You are on page 1of 88

Auckland Waste

Management and
Minimisation Plan

getting aucklands
waste sorted
June 2012

CONTENTS
FOREWORD 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PART A: Auckland now and into the future 12


1

Introduction 13

1.1 Context for Auckland waste management

15

1.2 Legislative and policy framework

16

VISION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES

22

2.1 Vision

22

2.2 Targets

23

2.3 Strategic objectives

24

2.4 Guiding principles

25

2.5 Tangata whenua world view on waste management and minimisation

26

2.6 Role of the council

27

2.7 Public health protection

28

2.8 Monitoring and reporting progress

28

3 THE CURRENT SITUATION: FINDINGS FROM THE


AUCKLAND council WASTE ASSESSMENT

28

3.1 Summary of key findings

28

4 LOOKING TO THE FUTURE

30

4.1 Future waste projections

30

4.2 Future resource recovery/recycling projections

31

4.3 Summary of future demand drivers

31

PART B: FUNDING

32

1 OVERVIEW

33

PROPOSED APPROACH

35

3 Financials 36

PART C: ACTION PLAN

38

40

INTRODUCTION TO THE ACTION PLAN

1.1 Strategic context

40

1.2 The action plan process

41

1.3 Criteria for identifying and assessing options

41

2 KEY methods 41
2.1 Standardise funding methods for domestic waste and recycling services

41

2.2 Kerbside refuse receptacles

43

2.3 Move towards a consistent domestic kerbside



recycling service across the region

45

2.4 Introduce a domestic kerbside organic waste collection

48

2.5 Regional inorganic collection

49

2.6 Develop a Resource Recovery Network (RRN)

50

2.7 Support business - particularly in the construction





and demolition industries

52

2.8 Advocate for product stewardship

52

2.9 Advocate for amendments to the Waste Minimisation Act 2008

54

2.10 Facilitate local enterprise

54

2.11 Investigate enacting a waste bylaw

55

2.12 Hauraki Gulf Islands

55

2.13 Implement a Strategic Framework for Communication,



Waste Minimisation Programmes and Community Development

56

ACTIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION

59

3.1 Waste policy and operational actions

61

3.2 Communications and Waste Minimisation Programmes

73

PART D: APPENDICES

76

Appendix 1: Auckland Council Waste Assessment

77

Appendix 2: Monitoring and Reporting Framework

77

Appendix 3: Community Grants Scheme Framework

80

Appendix 4: Options for Domestic Kerbside Organic Waste


Collection and Domestic Inorganic Waste Services

81

TABLE OF DEFINITIONS

86

Placement
to come
from
printer

Printed on Cocoon Offset Recycled, made from 100% FSC certified post-consumer
waste, processed chlorine free, using K+E Bio vegetable based inks and citrus cleaners.

FOREWORD
The way we deal with waste in the 21st century is challenging cities in every part
of the globe in unprecedented ways.
I fully recognise that changes have to be made if we are to protect and enhance
Auckland in the future. Tackling this complex issue will require courage, creativity
and resolve.
This is a challenging task. I will be taking a close personal interest in our progress
over the next few years.
This difficult issue touches everyone. It signals change to a smaller or greater degree
for every household, but these are changes that we, as Aucklanders, can make together
because we know for sure that they are for the good of the city and for all of us.
This plan is about reducing the waste we throw into the bin, and about recycling
and reusing more. We know that many of the resources we depend on, which we
have often taken for granted, are becoming scarce. Yet there is so much we can do
to ensure that resources we previously regarded as of no use such as food/green
waste and industrial waste are fully used, and reused, reducing what we send
to landfills.
We want to aim high but also make sure we take people with us. In particular,
the vulnerable must be protected and supported that is why any changes
will be made carefully over a period of four years.
All the actions that this plan will eventually require of us, are ones
we would expect of a country that brands itself as clean and green,
and of a city that aspires to be the worlds most liveable.

Len Brown
Mayor of Auckland

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 5

Executive Summary
Getting Aucklands Waste Sorted is the first Auckland-wide waste management and minimisation plan (WMMP). It is driven by
a number of pieces of legislation including the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA), the Local Government Act 2002 and the
Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010. With the amalgamation of the former councils, Auckland Council
has seized the unique opportunity to create an integrated suite of waste services across the region in order to significantly reduce
waste1 in the medium term, with the long-term aspirational goal of Zero Waste. In a world faced with many major challenges
now and in the future, this plan takes a precautionary approach to conserving Aucklands natural resources and doing it in an
economically efficient way.
Any potential change will be done carefully and in stages over the next few years. This will allow time for further collaborative
discussions with the waste industry and communities, and to enable an extensive education programme before, during and after
any change. At all stages the council will remain open to innovative and creative ideas from both industry and the community.
The plan, including a comprehensive list of actions, is based on the findings of the Auckland Council Waste Assessment2, and
feedback from a range of community and industry stakeholders. It also reflects the goals and directive of the Auckland Plan.
After analysing current waste services, and the nature of the industry and waste management infrastructure, the Auckland Council
Waste Assessment concluded that it will be challenging for the council to achieve a significant reduction in waste to landfill under
present ownership, governance and operational arrangements. This will need further consideration over time.
This plan focuses on the approximately 17 per cent of the waste stream that the council currently influences (the remaining over
80 per cent is largely controlled by the waste industry, with limited council influence). The plan outlines specific actions that the
council proposes to achieve consistent, streamlined, efficient waste services across the Auckland region in the domestic market
that it influences and a considerable reduction in waste to landfill. Although the council does not control the services provided by
the private sector, it will work collaboratively with the sector in order to achieve an overall reduction in waste to landfill under the
legislative requirement to promote effective and efficient waste management and minimisation within its district.
Creating a consistent, streamlined service means first addressing the different methods of waste collection, suites of services and
funding models operated by the seven former councils. This fragmentation, along with lack of council influence over the waste
stream, failed to fully meet the intent of either the WMA or the objectives of the former councils waste management plans.
Standardisation of service (with the exception of the Hauraki Gulf Islands, rural areas, some scenic and coastal holiday areas
and multi-unit properties) is one way to solve these shortcomings. The council recognises, however, that standardisation does
not necessarily mean one size fits all, so will work with local boards and communities to reflect local needs as far as practicable.
Working with industry, commerce and the waste sector is also vital, as is understanding the drivers of peoples behaviours.
Environmental, economic, social and cultural impacts of changes to waste services must also be considered. The complexity
of Aucklands waste situation needs a multifaceted WMMP. Whatever decisions are made, however, change is inevitable, and
the changes Auckland must make need to be managed carefully and progressively, particularly changes to refuse payment. The
approach taken in this plan is to help communities across Auckland to reduce, recycle and reuse as much as possible only then
will householders have to directly pay for what is left over that will go to landfill.
A wide range of initiatives are outlined in the plan. Some can be implemented immediately. Existing contracts that expire at
various points over the next few years mean other initiatives will have to be introduced over a longer timeframe. The council is
conscious that ratepayers, while being mindful of their environmental and wider responsibilities, want rates to be kept as low as
possible. The net cost (excluding growth and inflation) of the ultimate package of measures to reduce waste to landfill, including
the new measures, is not to exceed the net rates requirement for 2014/2015, bearing in mind that all households will have the
potential to substantially reduce the disposer-pays component of their waste if they use the full suite of services.
Local government amalgamation has presented Auckland with an excellent opportunity to redesign the way waste is managed
across the region and to become a leader in waste minimisation and resource efficiency. In doing so, Auckland can position itself
among other leading edge, innovative cities around the world working towards Zero Waste goals3.

1 The definition of waste used in this plan is from the WMA. It refers to anything disposed of or discarded and includes a type of waste that is defined
by its composition or source (e.g. organic waste, electronic waste, or construction and demolition waste) and to avoid doubt, includes any component
or element of diverted material, if the component or element is disposed of or discarded.
2 The Auckland Council Waste Assessment was released in February 2011, updated in July 2011 and formally noted in August 2011.
3

S uch as Vancouver (www.metrovancouver.org/services/solidwaste), San Francisco (www.sfenvironment.org/our_programs/overview)


and Adelaide (www.zerowaste.sa.gov.au).

IN BRIEF
The plan has three main drivers:

the legislative requirement that:


A territorial authority must promote
effective and efficient waste management
and minimisation within its district (WMA)

the legislative need to review the seven


former local authorities waste plans and
the obvious desirability of forming one
cohesive consistent WMMP for the region

the councils adoption of an aspirational


goal of Zero Waste.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 7

THE Plan Includes:


A vision:

'to become the most liveable city in the world, Auckland will aim
for the long-term, aspirational goal of Zero Waste4 by 20405,
turning its waste into resources'.
With:
a short to medium-term target to reduce domestic kerbside refuse
from 160kg to 110kg per capita per year (a 30 per cent reduction) by
2018, subject to the full range of services discussed in this plan being
implemented
a longer-term stretch goal to reduce total council- and privatesector-influenced waste to landfill by 30 per cent from the baseline
of 0.8 tonnes per capita per year over the next 15 years (by 20276)
by working with the commercial sector and the private waste industry
a n in-house target to reduce councils own in-house waste
by 30 per cent per capita by 20187.

guiding principles
strategic objectives
summary of findings from the Auckland Council Waste Assessment
actions/methods.

Zero Waste was the vision in the waste plans of five out of seven of the former councils of Auckland.

5 The Auckland Plan.


6

Estimated by Waste Not Consulting drawing on data from the former councils and available private data and subject to
discussions with the waste industry, appropriate regulation and ongoing resource allocation.

7 This figure is extrapolated out from waste audits done by Waste Not Consulting for the former Auckland and North Shore
city councils. A baseline for the new council was established in June 2012.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 9

Key actions/methods proposed


in this plan include:
1. a move towards consistent funding of domestic

a kerbside collection of organic waste for


urban areas only. This service would also be
private-good-funded (through rates and/or
other funding sources). This collection would
be complemented by an intensive drive to
encourage home composting, including in
areas where the organic service is not provided.
If the council were to provide a food waste only
collection, or a combined system where the
disposal of green waste would be minimal, that
would be accompanied by a determined effort
to work with the green waste industry to
reduce the 10 per cent of green waste still in
domestic refuse and other green waste which
currently finds its way to landfill.

a n inorganic collection to dispose of bulky


items and retrieve reusable and recyclable
items

p rovision of disposer-pays kerbside refuse


and private-good-funded (through rates and/
or other funding sources) recycling collection
services for domestic-type waste from
commercial properties.

waste and recycling services throughout the region


(in terms of public-good, private-good
and disposer-pays8)

2. provision of consistent domestic waste and


recycling services and receptacles across the
region from 2015, where practicable, including:

a fortnightly disposer-pays kerbside refuse


collection using wheelie bins in urban areas
with choice of bin size/capacity ranging from
60 to 240 litres, costing about $2.50 per lift9
for an 80litre bin. This charge per lift will be
commercially competitive

a fortnightly disposer-pays kerbside refuse


collection using a mix of wheelie bins (60 to
240 litres) and prepaid bags in rural areas,
the Hauraki Gulf Islands and certain holiday
and scenic areas, with pricing reflecting the
additional cost of this service

a fortnightly kerbside recycling collection


using wheelie bins with choice of bin size/
capacity ranging from 140 to 360 litres.
This service would be private-good-funded
(through rates and/or other funding sources).
This would include collecting a wider range of
recyclables than currently, with potential to
expand the range even further over time

If ratepayers adopt the full suite of services, thereby


minimising their disposer-pays costs, over the longer
term the average ratepayer/household will be no worse
off financially and will enjoy more services. Concurrently,
there will be a net environmental benefit10.

a 240-litre wheelie bin recycling service for


the former Rodney area as soon as practicable

Note that the council does not intend to run any of the
above services itself but would contract for provision.

S ee Part B, section 2 of this report for definitions of public-good,


private-good and disposer-pays.

9 This includes GST but does not take into account the start of the
Emissions Trading Scheme charging regime and is dependent on
the council retaining 90 per cent market share.

10 In terms of less waste to landfill and improved resource efficiency.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

3. development of a resource recovery network


including facilities for hazardous waste and
construction and demolition material drop-off

4. supporting business waste reduction particularly


in the construction and demolition industries

5. advocacy for Container Deposit Legislation


subject to further discussion with industry, and
development of product stewardship schemes
for products such as electronic waste, tyres,
batteries, nappies etc

6. advocacy for changes to the WMA to give industry


the same responsibilities for waste reduction as
local authorities

7. facilitating local enterprise through the council


developing initiatives and handing them to local
enterprises to run at an appropriate time and by
community grants and innovation competitions

8. investigating enactment of a waste bylaw by


31 October 2012 to support the intent of the
plan and actions detailed within it, including a
cleanfill regulation

9. introduction of a comprehensive waste


minimisation programme to support the changes
including education, community engagement
and community development.

Other actions
proposed in the
plan include:
developing waste and recycling services
for multi-unit dwellings

providing schools with recycling services


developing and enhancing waste exchange
and waste brokering services

piloting a sell-on-behalf-of service for


unwanted items of value

providing public place recycling bins


working towards all events organised by
the council and run on council properties
to be run as Zero Waste events

providing consistent loose litter collection across


the region and reducing litter and illegal dumping

developing comprehensive monitoring


and reporting systems.
Concurrent with these actions Auckland Council will
work with the waste industry and landfill owners to
reduce private sector-controlled volumes of waste to
landfill. It will also encourage innovative ideas for
specific waste streams (e.g. wood waste) which
could be recovered for reuse or energy conversion.
Auckland Council, including its council-controlled
organisations (CCOs), must also walk the talk by
demonstrating good waste-wise practice in its own
operational processes, rules, practices and procurement
policies. The councils preliminary in-house waste
assessments indicate potential to reduce waste. It will,
therefore, undertake to mirror the community kerbside
refuse target, by committing to a 30 per cent reduction
in waste per capita (from a 2012 baseline tonnage)
from its in-house activities by 2018.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

I 11

PARTA

DRAFT WASTE MINIMISATION & MANAGEMENT PLAN

AUCKLAND NOW
AND INTO THE FUTURE

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 13

1 introduction
Auckland sent 1.174 million tonnes
of waste to landfill in 201011.
This represents approximately 0.8tonnes
of waste for every person in Auckland12.
This waste includes a significant quantity
of material that, if separated, could be
recycled and put to beneficial use.
For example, around 65 per cent of kerbside
refuse collected from households could be
recycled or composted (or processed in some
other way) instead of being sent to landfill13.

11 K
 PMG data collection report, 24 June 2011. 1.174 million tonnes divided by 1,522,000 (high population projection) equals 0. 77 tonnes per capita,
rounded up to 0.8 tonnes per capita.
12 This figure is an average across the entire waste stream, not just the part the council influences.
13 Auckland Council Waste Assessment Appendix F: Auckland Council Waste Assessment Data Update Table 2.5. Waste Not Consulting. August 2011.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

15%

RECYCLABLES

35%
refuse
40%
FOOD WASTE
10%

green waste

Figure 1: Composition by weight of an average refuse bag/bin in Auckland14

The purpose of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA)


is to encourage waste minimisation and a decrease
in waste disposal in order to:

1
2

protect the environment


from harm; and
provide environmental, social,
economic and cultural benefits.

14 Food and green waste figures have a margin of error of 5 per cent. (Auckland Council Waste Assessment. Appendix C. Waste Not Consulting.
Composition of kerbside refuse from residential properties in Auckland. October 2010).

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 15

It also aims, through the waste levy, to increase the cost


of waste disposal so it better reflects the cost of waste
to the environment, society and the economy.
A waste management and minimisation plan (WMMP)
documents the goals and actions adopted by a council
to achieve effective, efficient waste management and
minimisation, as well as the funding rationale for waste
services and where the councils waste levy funding will
be spent. Most New Zealand councils already have a
waste management plan which, if reviewed, would not
require major changes in waste management practices.
However, the amalgamation of the Auckland councils
means the status quo seven completely different
waste systems is not a preferred or viable option.
A new, more equitable, efficient and effective
approach is needed. The first Auckland Council Waste
Management and Minimisation Plan is an opportunity
to design an integrated suite of systems that will
meet the councils legislated waste minimisation
responsibilities and steer Auckland on its journey
towards Zero Waste.

1.1 Context for


Auckland waste
management
The Local Government Act 2002 states that solid waste
collection and disposal is one of the five core services
that the council needs to consider in performing its
role, in particular with regard to the contribution that it
makes to its community. Before the 1990s, the rationale
for waste management was protection of public health.
However, the perceived need for councils to be involved
lessened as waste management standards improved,
and as landfill engineering and operation became
more specialised and capital-intensive. Consequently,
councils in the Auckland region, unlike those of other
large metropolitan areas, withdrew almost entirely from
waste infrastructure ownership.
In recent years, as the focus broadened to include
sustainability and waste minimisation, this lack of
involvement constrained Aucklands former councils in
meeting their waste minimisation obligations.
Auckland Council now only influences approximately
17 per cent15 of the waste stream, with the remainder
controlled by private waste operators.
15 R
 efer to Appendix F of the Auckland Council Waste Assessment.
The 17 per cent is based on 2008-2010 updated tonnage data
as a percentage of current regional waste to landfill.
15 R
 efer to Appendix F of the Auckland Council Waste Assessment.
The 17 per cent is based on 2008-2010 updated tonnage data as a
percentage of current regional waste to landfill.

This will remain a barrier to significant waste reduction


unless the waste industry and business, in collaboration
with the council, is able to voluntarily increase diversion
from landfill.
Change could be driven in three ways:

1. the government could amend the Waste


Minimisation Act 2008 to give industry the same
waste minimisation obligations as local authorities

2. Auckland Council could negotiate with


infrastructure owners to gain more influence
over the waste stream

3. in combination with option 1 or 2, the council


could establish additional resource recovery
infrastructure to overcome logistical hurdles for
new service provisions.
These scenarios need to be explored and all would take
some time to accomplish.
Consequently, this plan works on two fronts: working
with the private waste sector and the business
community to reduce waste volumes, and reducing
waste to landfill by focussing on the 17 per cent the
council currently influences.
Of the four landfills and 17 transfer facilities servicing
the Auckland region, Auckland Council has full control of
only one the Waitakere Refuse and Recycling Transfer
Station. It has no operational control of any landfills
apart from the small Claris landfill on Great Barrier Island.
And through its property CCO, the council owns a 50
per cent share of the Whitford landfill via a joint venture
with Transpacific Industries Ltd.
Most of the former Auckland councils were the principal
collectors of domestic kerbside waste in their areas
through contracts with the private sector. The exception
was the former Rodney District Council which left
residents to arrange their own collection services from
private waste operators. All former councils provided
a kerbside recycling service. Service levels differed
considerably in terms of receptacle used (bags or bins),
capacity (ranging from no restriction in the former
Manukau City Council to a cap of 120 litres in the
former Auckland City Council), and funding method
(from disposer-pays to fully rates-funded).

DRAFT WASTE
WASTE
Management
MINIMISATION
and Minimisation
& MANAGEMENT
PLANPLAN

1.2 Legislative and


Policy Framework
1.2.1 The Waste Minimisation Act 2008
The Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA) is the
key piece of legislation regulating waste management
in New Zealand. The sections of the WMA most
relevant to this WMMP are:
Section 3: Purpose of the Act
The purpose of the WMA is: to encourage waste
minimisation and a decrease in waste disposal to:

protect the environment from harm; and


provide environmental, social, economic
and cultural benefits.
Section 8: Product stewardship
The purpose of this part is to encourage (and, in
certain circumstances, require) the people and
organisations involved in the life of a product to
share responsibility for:

ensuring there is effective reduction, reuse,


recycling or recovery of the product; and

managing any environmental harm arising


from the product when it becomes waste.
Section 25: Waste disposal levy
The purpose of this part is to enable a levy
to be imposed on waste disposed of to:

raise revenue for promoting and achieving


waste minimisation; and

increase the cost of waste disposal to recognise


that disposal imposes costs on the environment,
society and the economy.

Section 42: Responsibilities of territorial authorities


A territorial authority must promote effective
and efficient waste management and minimisation
within its district.
Section 46: Funding of plans

1. A territorial authority is not limited to applying


strict cost recovery or user pays principles for any
particular service, facility, or activity provided by
the territorial authority in accordance with its
waste management and minimisation plan.

2. Without limiting subsection (1), a territorial


authority may charge fees for a particular service
or facility provided by the territorial authority that
is higher or lower than required to recover the costs
of the service or facility, or provide a service or
facility free of charge if:

it is satisfied that the charge or lack of charge


will provide an incentive or disincentive
that will promote the objectives of its waste
management and minimisation plan; and

t he plan provides for charges to be set


in this manner.

This plan considers waste and diverted materials


in keeping with the waste hierarchy, as required by
the WMA. The waste hierarchy states that waste
actions are to be addressed in priority order so as
to extract maximum benefit from resources and
to produce the least possible residual waste.

DRAFT
WASTE
WASTE
Management
MINIMISATION
and
& MANAGEMENT
Minimisation PLAN I 17

Other sections of the


WMA that are relevant
to this WMMP are
Section 43:
Waste management and
minimisation plans
Section 44:
Requirements when preparing,
amending, or revoking plans
Section 45:
Joint plans
Section 46:
Funding of plans
Section 47:
Grants

Section 51:
Requirements for waste assessment
Section 52:
Waste management and minimisation
services, facilities, and activities
Section 53:
Proceeds from activities and services
must be used in implementing waste
management and minimisation plan
Section 54:
Waste must be collected promptly,
efficiently, and regularly

Section 48:
Governor-General may give
directions to territorial authority

Section 55:
Health Protection Officer may serve
notice on territorial authority for
causing nuisance

Section 49:
Minister may set performance
standards for territorial authorities

Section 56:
Bylaws

Section 50:
Review of waste management and
minimisation plan

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

Reduction - lessening waste generation

Reuse - further using of products in their existing form


for their original purpose or a similar purpose

Recycling - reprocessing waste materials to


produce new products

Recovery - extraction of materials or energy from


waste for further use or processing, and includes, but
is not limited to making materials into compost

Waste
disposal

Treatment - subjecting waste to any


physical, biological, or chemical process to
change the volume or character of that
waste so that it may be disposed of with
no, or reduced, significant adverse effect
on the environment

disposal - final deposit of waste


on land set apart for the purpose

Figure 2: Waste hierarchy16

16 From the Ministry for the Environment website www.mfe.govt.nz

Maximum conservation of resources

Waste
diversion

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 19

The purpose of the WMA is to encourage waste


minimisation and a decrease in waste disposal in
order to protect the environment from harm, and
provide environmental, social, economic and cultural
benefits. It also requires councils to promote
effective and efficient waste management and
minimisation within their districts even if, as in
Auckland, over 80 per cent of waste and diverted
materials are collected, recovered and disposed of by
private operators. These legislative requirements are
the main reason for councils desire to explore, with
industry and government, ways to substantially
reduce waste to landfill.
The waste disposal levy introduced by the WMA is
currently set at $10 per tonne of waste disposed
to landfill (imposed at disposal facilities)17. This
is very low by international standards and is
likely to increase over time. The intention of the
levy is to put the cost of waste disposal (including
economic, environmental, social and cultural impacts
of landfilling) onto the disposer, creating an economic
incentive to divert and recycle.
The waste levy also creates a funding pool for
waste minimisation initiatives. Half of the money
collected is put into a contestable Waste Minimisation
Fund and the other half is split among local authorities
on a population basis. Local authorities must use
levy funds for waste minimisation in keeping with
their WMMPs. Funds can be withheld if the Minister
for the Environment believes the territorial authority
has not adopted a plan, reviewed it as required, has
not spent funds appropriately, or has not met
performance standards. Auckland Council currently
receives approximately $4.2 million annually from
waste levy funds.

1.2.2 New Zealand Waste Strategy


In adopting a WMMP, the council is required by the WMA
to have regard to the New Zealand Waste Strategy.

It includes specific targets for reducing various


types of waste including organic, special, construction,
demolition and hazardous waste. For example, one
of the targets for organic waste was to divert at
least 95 per cent of garden waste from landfill by
December 2010. This, and other targets, were not
achieved and specific targets have since been dropped
from the revised 2010 strategy. However the council
considers that they remain valid goals to aim for
within an updated timeframe, as without targets
the focus is diluted.

The plan covers all aspects of


waste management from collection
to treatment and disposal.
The revised 2010 Waste Strategy, Reducing
harm, improving efficiency, provides direction
to local government, businesses (including the
waste industry), and communities on ways to:

reduce the harmful effects of waste

improve the efficiency of resource use18.

The WMMP defines waste as waste to landfill.


Diverted materials means discarded materials not sent
to landfill such as those collected for recycling and
composting. The plans primary focus is solid waste.
However, it also takes into account the potential harm
of all wastes: solids, liquids and gases (but not the
collection or treatment of human bio-solid waste
although treatment of the residual sludge for reuse
might be explored in future in collaboration with
Watercare Services Ltd).
The plan covers all aspects of waste management from
collection to treatment and disposal. In the waste
hierarchy landfilling is the least desirable outcome
however, it is not technically or economically feasible
to divert all materials from landfill at this time.

The first New Zealand Waste Strategy, Towards Zero


Waste and a sustainable New Zealand, released in
2002 sets out the governments long-term priorities
for waste management and minimisation.

17 This amount remains unchanged following a recent high


level national review by the Minister for the Environment.

18 These are the two goals of the New Zealand Waste


Strategy 2010.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

While Auckland Council accepts that landfilling will


remain the main waste disposal option for some time,
its WMMP establishes Zero Waste as a long-term
aspirational goal and the key driver of council services.
Councils decisions on the plan must also accord
with the following Acts of Parliament:

Local Government Act (LGA) 2002


The Health Act 1956
Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991
Emissions Trading Amendment Act 2008
 he Hazardous Substances and New
T
Organisms Act 1996 (HSNO)

Waste collection, treatment, and disposal has been


highlighted as a source of greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, and is believed to be responsible for
6 per cent of Aucklands overall emissions (based
on 2009 levels19). It is estimated that in 2009 GHG
emissions from waste totalled 618 ktCO2e (kilotonnes
of carbon dioxide equivalent). Under a business as
usual scenario, emissions are projected to increase
a further 35.8 per cent by 2031. Councils goal is a
40 per cent reduction in human generated GHG
emissions20 by 2031 (based on 1990 levels). The
WMMP must contribute to the target by creating
and identifying waste minimisation, collection and
treatment services and single-stream (e.g. waste
wood) waste-to-energy opportunities. The council
is currently developing a GHG emission reduction
strategy for discussion.

 limate Change (Emissions Trading)


C
Amendment Act 2008
Local Government
(Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010

WMMP establishes Zero Waste


as a long-term aspirational
goal and the key driver
of council services.

19 A
 RUP (2011) Potential Policy Options to reduce Greenhouse
Draft Technical
Report to
(2011).
Client
Report
19 AGas
RUPEmissions:
(2011) Potential
Policy Options
reduce
Greenhouse
for Auckland
Gas
Emissions:Council.
Draft Technical Report (2011). Client Report for
Auckland Council.
20 The Auckland Plan.
20 The Auckland Plan

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 21

To become the most liveable


city in the world, Auckland will
aim for the long-term, aspirational
goal of Zero Waste by 2040, turning
its waste into resources.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

2 Vision and
Guiding Principles
2.1 Vision
To become the most liveable city in the
world, Auckland will aim for the long
term, aspirational goal of Zero Waste by
2040, turning its waste into resources.
Zero Waste means changing the way
we think about waste, treating it as a
resource rather than a disposal problem.
Put another way, Zero Waste is
about moving from linear to cyclical
resource flows.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 23

2.2 Targets

design

marketing
processing

linear

raw materials

manufacturer

Auckland Council, underpinned by the plans of the


former councils, wishes to work towards a substantial
reduction in the entire waste stream sent to landfill.
This plan provides:

details on how the council proposes to deal


with the waste it directly influences

sorting

cyclical

collection

an outline of councils intentions towards


reducing total waste to landfill.
consumption

Source separation
landfill disposal

Figure 3: Linear and cyclical


resource flows
The Zero Waste philosophy encourages redesigned
resource life cycles in which almost all products and
materials are reused as in the natural world. Minimal
waste is sent to landfills. The following working
definition, often cited by experts in the field, came
from a working group of the Zero Waste International
Alliance in 200421.
Zero Waste is 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.
Encouraging waste reduction at source through
informed purchasing and producer responsibility, and
establishing resource recovery and recycling systems
further down the supply chain, gives Auckland the
potential to significantly reduce waste to landfill
and become a resource efficient city.

This plan focuses on the 17 per cent of the waste


stream that the council influences (made up of
domestic kerbside waste collections). Therefore, the one
short to medium-term target chosen to measure the
effectiveness of the plan over the next six years is
also in the area of domestic kerbside waste collections.
Each person in the Auckland region produces, on
average, approximately 160kg22 of kerbside refuse per
year (including refuse collected by the private sector).
The former Auckland councils with disposer-pays
funding methods sent the least waste to landfill
as little as 104kg per person per year. Those that used
rates funding and unrestrained volumes sent as much
as 199kg per person per year. While this comparison
does not take into account other variables such as
the size of the bin or bag, the range of recyclables
collected23, waste minimisation initiatives or socioeconomic factors, it still suggests that introducing
disposer-pays across the Auckland region will
significantly reduce the amount of waste sent
to landfill.
The initiative expected to produce the largest waste
reduction, if introduced with disposer-pays funding for
refuse, is kerbside organic waste collection (food waste
only or food waste plus green waste). Because around
50 per cent (by weight) of the contents of kerbside
refuse bins and bags is organic material24 (with food
waste being about 40 per cent of the bin, and green
waste about 10 per cent), this action has the potential
to almost halve the domestic kerbside waste stream.

22 B
 ased on 2010/2011 data. Total council-collected kerbside residential
tonnes divided by population using council services. This does not relate
directly to the figure of approximately 0.8 tonnes per person given in the
introduction section as this larger figure includes waste from all sources
including commercial waste, household hazardous waste, waste dropped
off at transfer stations and inorganic collections.
23 This does not include the inorganic collection.

21

www.zwia.org

24 Auckland Council Waste Assessment Appendix F: Auckland Council Waste


Assessment Data Update Table 2.5. Waste Not Consulting. August 2011.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

If the council were to provide a food waste only collection,


that would be accompanied by a determined effort to
work with the green waste industry to reduce the 10 per
cent of green waste still in domestic refuse and other
green waste which currently finds its way to landfill.

Based on these and other initiatives in the action


plan (and subject to economic viability assessments),
the short to medium-term target for council and
private sector domestic kerbside refuse sent to landfill
is a 30 per cent reduction from the current regional
average of 160kg per person per year to 110kg per
person per year by 2018.

Before amalgamation, the Royal Commission on Auckland


Governance25 noted that the fragmented nature of the
region meant opportunities were being lost, including
public education programmes using television and other
media. With amalgamation, Auckland can now roll out a
major regional public education campaign to support the
significant changes proposed.

a substantial investment in a comprehensive


waste minimisation programme, including education
(e.g. reducing food waste, alternatives
to disposable nappies), community engagement and
community development.

Longer-term, and subject to the collaborative programmes


with the private sector outlined in the action plan and
ongoing discussions with the waste industry, the council
aims for a stretch goal of 30 per cent reduction in waste
going to landfill (council and waste industry influenced)
over the next 15 years from a baseline of 0.8 tonnes per
capita per year.

Current (2010/2011),
160kg per person per year

target (2018)
110kg per person per year

Figure 4: Domestic kerbside refuse short


to medium-term target of 30 per cent
reduction per capita per year
This target can be achieved by combining:

a different charging regime

potential investment in new infrastructure


for collecting and processing organic waste

a reduction in overall organic volumes to landfill


through collaboration with the waste industry

an intensive, incentivised drive for home composting

a restriction of organic waste (green waste


and food waste) from domestic refuse collections

2.3 Strategic
objectives
To most effectively reduce waste, Auckland Council
has adopted Strategic Option 3 in the Auckland Council
Waste Assessment26 as its preferred strategic direction.
One of the parts of this option refers to either gaining
more influence over the entire waste stream to
encourage separation and resource recovery (and reduce
waste going to landfill), or advocating for changes to
the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA) to give
industry the same waste minimisation responsibilities
as local authorities.
Negotiations with industry to secure more council
influence over the waste stream could be a medium
to long-term exercise. The focus of this plan is, therefore,
primarily on the part of the waste stream that the
council influences, made up mainly of domestic kerbside
collections, with a smaller amount from transfer station
drop-off and inorganic collections.

25 Royal Commission on Auckland Governance 2009 report


www.royalcommission.govt.nz
26 http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/Services/Documents/
wasteassess-report.pdf

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 25

With this in mind, the strategic objectives of


this plan are:

reducing Aucklands reliance on landfills


achieving operational efficiencies in
domestic waste and recycling services
reducing harm from waste

restricting organic waste going to landfill

developing an infrastructure and processes


to maximise resource recovery

reducing councils responsibility for dealing


with end-of-life consumer products and packaging
through appropriate advocacy

maximising local economic development


opportunities; e.g. jobs created by diverting
waste from landfill

reducing litter and illegal dumping and


related costs.

2.4 Guiding Principles

is underpinned by mauri as a key concept for


indigenous resource management and waste so
that land, water and food gathering sources are
protected from the inappropriate disposal of waste28

is built on the premise that innovation and


lateral thinking are needed to solve intractable
waste problems

supports the idea that, wherever possible, the


generator of waste should be responsible for
paying the true cost of managing waste, thereby
encouraging waste reduction

signals that communities need to understand


and be involved in solutions. A strong emphasis is
placed on promoting waste reduction behaviour
by engaging the community through direct
involvement, education and community-based
programmes

is also open to developing partnerships with


tangata whenua in order to:

- support sustainable development of


Ma-ori outcomes, leadership, community
and partnerships

This waste management and minimisation plan


(WMMP) draws on key principles to guide
decision-making. The plan:

- enable tangata whenua to co-manage


natural resources29

is based on the internationally recognised waste


hierarchy (figure 2), the goal of which is to move
up the waste hierarchy as far as possible

recognises kaitiakitanga27 and stewardship, which


takes an integrated view of the environment and
the relationship between all things. Kaitiakitanga
and stewardship represent the obligation of current
generations to sustain the environments capacity
to support life for present and future generations

aims to deliver the most cost effective and


efficient solutions to meet the requirements of
the WMA and the New Zealand Waste Strategy
while maximising waste diversion and minimising
costs to ratepayers

will be monitored and evaluated, and reported


on each year. Accurate data is essential to track
progress and enable future decision-making

supports improving energy efficiency and


carbon sequestration and reducing greenhouse
gas emissions.

is integrated, meaning it addresses all legislative


requirements and is aligned with councils own
policies and bylaws

incorporates the principles of sustainability by


considering the social, cultural, environmental and
economic impacts of its decisions

27  The exercise of guardianship by the tangata whenua of an area in


accordance with tikanga Ma-ori in relation to natural and physical
resources; and includes the ethic of stewardship (Resource
Management Act 1991, s.2.1).

28 A
 s acknowledged by the New Zealand Waste Strategy 2002, inappropriate
waste disposal can damage the relationship Ma-ori have with their
lands, waters, food gathering areas, and wa-hi tapu. Dumping waste into
mahinga kai diminishes the sites mauri and mahinga kai values. The
interdependence of mahinga kai ecosystems means any contamination,
even of one species, has a negative flow-on to all species in the ecosystem,
including people. (Draft Regional Policy Statement 2010.)
29 The Auckland Plan.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

2.5 Tangata whenua


world view on waste
management and
minimisation

As the people are intrinsically linked with the natural


world, the mana of the iwi, hapu, or wha-nau is directly
related to the wellbeing of the natural resources within
their rohe, or region33.

manaaki tangata: care and regard for the people

2.5.1 Introduction

The tangata whenua world view encapsulates


multi-layered concepts in relation to environmental
knowledge. At the heart of the tangata whenua/
mana whenua world view is a belief that everything
and everyone is interconnected and, therefore, should
be valued and cared for30. To be consistent with this
view, waste management and minimisation cannot be
regarded in isolation from environmental management31.
This is an essential feature of Te Ao Ma-ori. This section
summarises those tangata whenua ethics, values
and principles that inform waste management and
minimisation32.

manaaki whenua: care and regard for the land


manaaki atua: care and regard for taonga Ma-ori

2.5.2 Tangata whenua high level


ethics and values
Tangata whenua ethics and values stem from a belief
system about the origin of the universe in which humans
and nature are not separate, but related parts of a
unified whole. Descended from the union of Ranginui
(the sky father) and Papatuanuku (the earth mother)
and their offspring, humans share a common whakapapa
(genealogy) with other animals, plants and geographic
locations. According to whakapapa, the natural world is
our kaitiaki (guardian) who nurtures and cares for us. The
concept of reciprocity and reverence means we in turn
are also kaitiaki with a responsibility to care for
te ao turoa (environment). As a result there are functional
relationships between tangata whenua and particular
ecosystems that are unique to iwi, hapu and wha-nau.
The primary responsibility for mana o te whenua
(status of the land) in this context resides with ahikaa
or mana whenua from specific geographical areas.

For Mana Whenua in the Auckland region, Mana Motuhake


(absolute sovereignty) is the term that best describes
sustainability in te ao turoa as it focuses on the value of:

(natural resources) bestowed upon the whenua


by Io (creator).

2.5.3 Waste management and minimisation


There is no waste in nature and there was very little
waste in the early society of tangata whenua. In fact,
the Ma- ori language does not have a word that aligns
directly to the meaning of waste. The waste produced by
tangata whenua was of a high organic content and was
disposed of onto or into the land, where it would slowly
decay and not come into contact with water sources.
Waste was viewed as a resource which would return to
Papatuanuku (earth mother) as compost. Everything was
biodegradable, or could be reused, recycled or viewed as
a recoverable resource.
The traditional handling of waste was organised so
that waste associated with specific activities was handled
through a complex set of rules34. These practices required
different disposal methods for different types of waste,
for example human waste was not mixed with food
waste. A closed loop approach ensured that material
was separated appropriately for composting or further
use. Body waste was kept separate from solid waste
and disposed of back into the ground at a great
distance from water.
Advances in technology mean that waste produced
by all sectors of society has become more difficult
to deal with, due to:

increased volume brought on by an increased


population and behavioural changes

an increase in non-organic and potentially hazardous


components to the waste stream35.

30 A
 uckland Regional Council (2007) Te Kohao o te Ngira,
Mana Whenua response to the draft long term Sustainability
Framework for the Auckland Region.
33 Department of Conservation (2002) NZ Biodiversity Strategy.
31 M
 inistry for the Environment (1993) Planning in Waste
Management, Te Whakaari o Takitimu. Guidelines for Ma-ori.
32 A
 uckland Regional Council (2007) Te Kohao o te Ngira,
Mana Whenua response to the draft long-term sustainability
framework for the Auckland region.

34 M
 inistry for the Environment (1993) Planning in Waste Management,
Te Whakaari o Takitimu. Guidelines for Ma-ori p73.
35 S outhland Regional council (1996) Regional Solid Waste
Management Plan.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 27

Modern solid waste management and minimisation


can incorporate a tangata whenua world view. There
are also specific realities which need to be considered
particular to tangata whenua when developing waste
management and minimisation plans. For example, it
is well documented that tangata whenua have strongly
voiced the need to keep waste (and the leachate from
waste) out of surface, ground and coastal waters and
to ensure that refuse disposal facilities are not sited on
waahi tapu (areas of cultural or historical significance).
Tangata whenua ethics and values can provide the
framework to explore strategies and techniques to deal
with solid waste in the Auckland region, as modern
concepts of valuing natural resources, reusing, recycling
materials, and care with disposal of residual waste have
many synergies with the tangata whenua world view.

2.6 Role of the council


The purpose of the WMA is to encourage waste
minimisation and a decrease in waste disposal. The
councils role under the act is to promote effective and
efficient waste management and minimisation within
its district. Although the council has adopted Strategic
Option 3 in the Auckland Council Waste Assessment
as its preferred strategic direction, it does not intend
to run its own collection services, but wherever
practicable, provide them via waste operator contracts.
In addition, the council is keen to encourage innovation
within the private sector such that waste is seen as a
valuable resource.
The council is focused on the end goal and on how
services are provided to achieve this goal. Who delivers
the services is a secondary consideration. The council
will support and encourage industry when it is working
proactively towards the same goal.
Auckland Councils governance, policy development
and operation of waste management are conducted
as follows.

Governing body
Auckland Councils governing body and local boards
share decision-making responsibilities. The governing
body focuses on region-wide strategic decisions,

such as regional landfill contracts, the shape of regional


waste services, preparing a solid waste bylaw, and
setting regional strategies, policies and plans. The
governing body will consult with and consider the
views of the local boards before making decisions that
affect the communities within each local boards area,
or the responsibilities or operations of that board.
The governing body is responsible for the
following waste activities:

Auckland WMMP

standards and guidelines for waste


management and disposal

region-wide service standards, such as


refuse and recycling services

landfill management.

Local boards
Local boards are responsible for communication with
community organisations and special interest groups
within their local board area and identifying and
communicating the interests and preferences of the
people in local board areas in relation to the content
of the councils strategies, policies, plans and bylaws.
In accordance with legislative principles, local boards
are generally responsible for making decisions on
non-regulatory activities except where decision-making
on a region-wide basis will better promote the
wellbeing of communities across Auckland.
Under the current allocation of decision-making
between the governing body and local boards,
local boards have decision-making and oversight
of variations to region-wide service levels for the
local area, such as refuse and recycling services, and
have decision-making and oversight of local waste
management plans and projects, within regional
parameters. Local boards will be an important part
of the implementation of this plan, advising on such
aspects as the rural/urban boundary split, the provision
of community education, the placement and number
of public place recycling bins and service levels in
the Hauraki Gulf Islands. They may also choose to
be proactively involved in the potential establishment
of local resource recovery centres36.

36 Any actions would be in the context of local board budgets.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

2.7 Public health


protection
The wide range of public and private waste services
in the Auckland region ensures public health will be
adequately protected in the future. Auckland has
access to landfills that meet national legislative
requirements for at least 20 years or more. This plan
proposes services for better waste minimisation and
considers alternatives to landfills in the longer term.
The community has adequate access to council or
privately-owned drop-off and collection services for
refuse, hazardous waste and litter, but further service
improvements and waste minimisation are achievable.
In its feedback on the Auckland Council Waste
Assessment, Auckland Regional Public Health Service
stated no major concerns relating to public health
with current solid waste services and said the waste
assessment appeared to be thoroughly researched.
Correspondence with Auckland Regional Public
Health Service is included in Appendix F of the waste
assessment and its feedback has been considered in
this plan.

2.8 Monitoring and


reporting progress
The council intends to monitor and report on progress
regarding the WMMP and will develop and implement
a clear, transparent monitoring and reporting system
for this. Accurate information on how services are
performing is essential for monitoring progress and
planning for future demand.
Key areas that require monitoring include level of
service, compliance (with legislative requirements and
regulations), waste reduction and diversion. Data will
be gathered through community satisfaction surveys,
council records (KPIs, etc), Solid Waste Analysis Protocol
Audits (SWAPs) and agreements with landfill operators
to supply tonnage data. Progress will be reported
through council publications, website andthe annual
report. See Appendix 2 for further details.

3 The Current
Situation:
Findings from
the Auckland
council Waste
Assessment
The Auckland Council Waste Assessment37 was initiated
under the auspices of the Auckland Transition Agency and
released in February 2011. It was then updated in
July 2011 and formally noted in August 2011. The
assessment is a stock-take of waste services provided
throughout the region, an estimate of demand for future
services, and includes proposals (including new
infrastructure) for meeting that demand.

3.1 Summary of
key findings

Auckland sent 1.174 million tonnes38 of waste


to landfill in 2010 including domestic and
industrial and commercial waste. This represents
approximately 0.8 tonnes per person per year.

Waste management and minimisation services are


fragmented in Auckland. Few key facilities are owned
by the council, and the majority of landfills and
transfer stations are owned by two large commercial
waste companies. As a consequence, the council
influences only approximately 17 per cent of the
waste stream; the rest is controlled by private
industry.

There is limited information on the quantity or


composition of waste sent to managed fill and

37 w
 ww.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/wasteplan Waste Assessment
documents are at the bottom of the web page.
38 A
 ppendix F of the Auckland Council Waste Assessment: Auckland Council Waste
Assessment Data Update. Waste Not Consulting. Based on data provided by
KPMG August 2011.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 29

cleanfill sites in the Auckland region. However, it


is estimated that just under 1.8 million39 tonnes
of material is disposed of annually, 30 per cent
of which is construction and demolition material.
(There is a need for accurate data if progress is to be
tracked with confidence.)

The council kerbside services collected 194,564


tonnes40 of refuse in 2010/2011. Of this, it is
estimated that more than 50 per cent was organic
material (about 40 per cent of the total being food
waste and 10 per cent green waste41).

It is estimated that up to 30 per cent of the waste


Auckland sends to landfill from all sources could
be diverted42. This material would include organics,
timber, metal and plastics43.

The rates component of waste services to


householders varies considerably across the region,
depending on the services offered by former
councils and the methods of funding. The lowest
solid waste component of household rates is that of
former councils that implemented disposer-pays for
refuse services.

Many opportunities were lost under the old


Auckland governance structure, including uniform
systems for kerbside collections. The new
governance structure reignites those opportunities
as waste management services, particularly the
recovery of recyclables, lend themselves to a
regional approach. This is an economic issue:
combined waste streams allow economies of scale
when making the large investments needed for new
sorting technology and facilities44.

A range of issues and risks rule out waste to energy


(WTE) as an option for dealing withAucklands
domestic waste stream at this time, although this
may well change in the future. A key issue is that
WTE is on the recovery level of the waste hierarchy
(see Fig. 2, page 15 of the Auckland Council Waste

Assessment) and therefore at odds with the Waste


Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA) and the councils
Zero Waste goal45. Additionally, the council
currently has insufficient influence over Aucklands
waste stream to supply a WTE facility, which
involves significant capital costs46.(Subsequent
to the waste assessment, a draft climate change
mitigation strategy is being worked on that
considers certain waste streams potential as
feedstock for energy generation.)

Transport inefficiencies were identified relating


to the distances council-contracted waste
operators travel from waste collection areas
to and from transfer stations and landfills47.
Although after further analysis these were not as
high as originally thought, there is still potential
for some improvement, particularly as costs were
not included for other important aspects such
as congestion impacts, transfer station or landfill
waiting times, emissions and pollution, road
damage, truck configurations, transfer station or
landfill opening hours, and night hours and bulk
hauling at night. After discussions with the waste
industry it is clear that the industry is very focussed
and successful in mitigating transport inefficiencies.

The three strategic direction options identified in


the waste assessment were to:

1. continue with the status quo with some


streamlining

2. continue with the status quo with new


activities to maximise diversion (including
a kerbside organic collection of some sort).

3. take actions as in option (2) but also seek


operational influence over the entire waste
stream, advocate for legislation for stronger
product stewardship and/or that places similar
requirements on the private sector to reduce
waste as required of local government under
the WMA. (Option 3 was subsequently adopted
by Auckland Council on 15 March 2011.)

39 Auckland Council Waste Assessment. Chapter 3. Table 3.4-4.


40 A
 ppendix F of the Auckland Council Waste Assessment: Auckland Council
Waste Assessment Data Update. Waste Not Consulting. August 2011.
41

Initial estimate from the Waste Assessment Part C . Organics report


Page 4. Reassessed by Waste Not Aug 2011.

45 A
 ppendix F of the Auckland Council Waste Assessment: Waste to Energy
for Auckland discussion paper. Campbell McPherson. May 2011.

42

E stimates of potential to reduce waste to landfill were mindful of


high reductions in some European countries (over 60 per cent) where
significant regulation has been imposed but were calculated for Auckland
conditions.

46 H
 owever, the door needs to stay open to this possibility in the future, and
proactive consideration can be given to specific waste streams being utilised
for the production of heat or as a fuel source, such as a significant amount of
wood waste (60,000 tonnes per year) that is currently being diverted from
landfill for use as a bio-fuel in some wood-fired burners of industries such
as timber processing.

43 Waste Not supplementary data the Waste Assessment, August 2011.


The overall goal emanates from this data.
44 A
 ppendix F of the Auckland Council Waste Assessment: Royal Commission
on Auckland Governance report. Part 5, Section 30.

47 A
 ppendix F of the Auckland Council Waste Assessment: Evaluating potential
transport inefficiencies in Auckland waste. Ernst and Young. May 2011- case
study on council-controlled domestic waste collection.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

4 Looking to the Future


4.1 Future waste projections
Waste generation is traditionally linked to economic and population growth. However, accurate waste
projections are difficult, given the limited data on Aucklands waste trends and the recent world recession,
which has contributed to a temporary drop in waste to landfill of over 16 per cent48.
The following projections are based on 2.7 per cent waste growth per year. This figure has been chosen as
the mid-point between projected long-term GDP growth of 3.54 per cent and projected long-term population
growth of 1.8 per cent.

COUNCIL-COLLECTED KERBSIDE WASTE TO LANDFILL


300,000

2.7% growth,
no change to services

COUNCIL-COLLECTED KERBSIDE
WASTE TO LANDFILL
Introduction of 3-bin kerbside collection, disposer-pays

300,000

2.7% growth,
2.7%new
growth,
with
services
no change to services

for refuse & Rodney refuse collection service

250,000

Introduction of 3-bin kerbside collection, disposer-pays


for refuse & Rodney refuse collection service

2.7% growth,
with new services

(TONNES)
WASTEWASTE
(TONNES)

250,000

200,000

Graph 1:
Council-collected
kerbside waste to
landfill projection

200,000

150,000

150,000

100,000

100,000

50,000

50,000

0
2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

DATE

0
2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

DATE

TOTAL AUCKLAND WASTE TO LANDFILL (COUNCIL PLUS COMMERCIAL)


1,800,000

1,800,000
1,600,000

Introduction of 3-bin kerbside collection, disposer-pays


TOTAL AUCKLAND WASTE
TO
LANDFILL
(COUNCIL
PLUS COMMERCIAL)
for refuse
& Rodney
refuse collection
service

2.7% growth,
no change to services
2.7% growth,
2.7% growth,
with new services
no change to services

Introduction of 3-bin kerbside collection, disposer-pays


for refuse & Rodney refuse collection service

(TONNES)
WASTEWASTE
(TONNES)

1,600,000
1,400,000

2.7% growth,
with new services

Graph 2:
Total waste to
landfill (Council plus
Commercial) projection

1,400,000
1,200,000

1,200,000
1,000,000

1,000,000
800,000

800,000
600,000
600,000
400,000
400,000
200,000
200,000
0

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

0
2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

DATE

2016

DATE

2017
2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

48 Appendix F of the Auckland Council Waste Assessment. Auckland Council Waste Assessment Data Update. Waste Not Consulting. August 2011.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 31

4.2 Future resource 4.3 Summary of future


recovery and
demand drivers
recycling projections
Future demand for waste and recycling services
in the region could be driven by:

Resource recovery activities rely on a source of


discarded materials (from kerbside recycling collections
or construction and demolition waste, for example)
and a market for these materials.
The market for diverted materials is extremely variable,
with economic fluctuations having a significant impact
on both supply and demand.
Waste growth of 2.7 per cent a year would increase
demand for the councils kerbside collection services
(not to mention other recoverable-material services).
If disposer-pays charging for refuse is introduced,
demand would become even stronger as householders
seek to minimise their waste disposal costs by recycling
more. These higher levels of diversion would inevitably
create pressure to expand the capacity of existing
resource recovery facilities, and for the creation of new
facilities and services. This is seen as an opportunity for
both the waste sector and for community groups to
expand reuse or recycling initiatives, with the potential
to create both jobs and training opportunities for
young people.

The market for diverted


materials is extremely
variable, with economic
fluctuations having a
significant impact on both
supply and demand.

growth in the Auckland region: number of


households or population serviced

changes in commercial and industrial


activity or economic conditions

land use changes (e.g. from agricultural


to residential)

changing patterns in consumption or


product quality

national policy and legislation


(e.g. product stewardship, waste levy)

council regulation (e.g. bans on certain


materials to landfill)

council waste minimisation and education


programmes

impact of waste flows from and to


other regions

changes in technology

community expectations.

PARTB
Funding

DRAFT WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 33

1 OVERVIEW
To fund the recommended actions in this waste
management and minimisation plan (WMMP),
the following must be considered:

alignment with the intent of the Waste


Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA) to minimise waste
to landfill and raise the cost of disposal to landfill

affordability and the minimisation of costs


to the rates account

transparency

equity and fairness.

Councils have a number of funding systems available


for paying for waste services. The primary sources of
income for councils are rates funding and user charges
on some or all of the resident population. The option
recommended in this plan for refuse collection and
disposal is disposer-pays a transparent method with
direct correlation between household use of the service
and the associated cost.
A secondary revenue source for Auckland Council
is commercial waste activities such as operation of
the Waitakere Refuse and Recycling Transfer Station,
licensing fees, dividends (such as from Whitford Landfill
joint venture) and other waste services such as revenue
from the Waiheke Transfer Station.
A third source comes from bundling the cost of
collection services and using some of the revenue from
disposer-pays to offset costs of private-good waste and
recycling services, as per section 46 of the WMA,
which states:

(2)Without limiting subsection (1), a territorial


authority may charge fees for a particular service or
facility provided by the territorial authority that is
higher or lower than required to recover the costs of
the service or facility, or provide a service or facility
free of charge, if:
(a) it is satisfied that the charge or lack of charge
will provide an incentive or disincentive
that will promote the objectives of its waste
management and minimisation plan; and
(b) the plan provides for charges to be set in
this manner.
A fourth source is funding from the government
waste levy. For 2012/13 the levy funds available
to Auckland Council are anticipated to be about
$4.2 million. This comes from the portion (50 per cent)
of the government waste levy funding pool allocated
to local authorities on a population basis. Central
government stipulates that this money is to be spent
on waste minimisation activities in accordance with
WMMPs. These activities have been clearly identified in
this plan.
The council plans to spend approximately $1.2 million
of the waste levy income annually on additional waste
minimisation education and promotion49 over the
first four years of the plan a significant increase on
previous expenditure levels. The short-term spike is
expected to diminish as waste reduction outcomes are
achieved. This portion of the levy money will then be
redirected into other waste minimisation activities50.

46 Funding of plans
(1)A territorial authority is not limited to applying
strict cost recovery or user pays principles for any
particular service, facility, or activity provided by
the territorial authority in accordance with its waste
management and minimisation plan.

49 Initial council estimate of the range of education programmes.


To be refined after formal consultation.
50 In 2010/2011 waste levy funds were used to enhance kerbside
recycling services in the former Papakura and Franklin areas.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

Theplan also indicates that $1.6 million will be spent


every year on offsetting the cost of introducing a new
enhanced kerbside recycling service for schools, an
extended WasteWise schools programme and
a community grants scheme. The remaining
$1.4 million waste levy funding will be spent on
ongoing implementation and strategic planning of
the new initiatives adopted in the WMMP. A portion
of it will be accumulated to offset the capital costs
for setting up an organics processing facility.
Auckland Council could also apply for funding from the
contestable portion (50 per cent less Ministry for the
Environment (MfE) administration costs) of the waste
levy funding pool (the Waste Minimisation Fund) to help
establish an organic waste collection and processing
facility, in partnership with the waste industry. This will
be explored when decisions on the final suite of services
are made. Likewise, an application to match funding in
the proposed community grants scheme ($500,000)
could be investigated.
When discussing the funding of publicly provided
services, issues around public-good, private-good and
disposer-pays need to be considered. Public-good,
used in the context of waste services, generally refers
to services provided for the public in order to meet
environmental policies and standards. These services
which benefit the whole community cannot normally
be linked to specific individuals who use the service, so
the cost is usually met through general rates.
Private-good often refers to services that meet
environmental policies and standards that are linked
to specific individuals kerbside recycling services,
for example. In most cases costs are met through
general rates or subsidised by other waste services or
the government waste levy. If disposer-pays for refuse
is chosen, some of the private-good costs can be
legitimately met through a small surcharge, reflecting
both the community and individual benefit derived
from services.

Disposer-pays aligns closely with central governments


policy to provide financial disincentives in order to
minimise waste sent to landfill. As a consequence there
are areas where disposer-pays is the most appropriate
funding approach, such as for refuse disposal collections
taken to landfill. Additionally, the legislation allows local
government to subsidise other private-good services
through any disposer-pays services surpluses.
Charging methods for waste services have varied
considerably across the region. With regard to kerbside
refuse services, some ratepayers currently pay directly
for the refuse they send to landfill by purchasing bags
or stickers (disposer-pays). Others pay indirectly
through their rates bill. Kerbside recycling collections,
on the other hand, are generally paid for by rates or by
revenue from other waste services operations.
Because charging mechanisms and services both vary,
it is hard to give a simple cost comparison across
former councils. Each had its own mix of receptacle
size, collection frequency, charging mechanisms
and percentage of private sector services. The mix
of streamlined services and consistent funding
mechanisms proposed in this plan are intended to
reduce waste to landfill while delivering services at the
lowest possible cost to the ratepayer.
In view of this, the net cost (excluding growth and
inflation) of the ultimate package of measures to
reduce waste to landfill including the new measures, is
not to exceed the net rates requirement for 2014/2015,
bearing in mind that all households will have the
potential to substantially reduce the disposer-pays
component of their waste if they utilise the full suite
of services.

DRAFT WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 35

2 Proposed
Approach
2.1 Public-good
services51
Services considered to be for public good
that will be funded through rates include:

2.2 Private-good
services
Services considered to be for private good that will
be funded through surpluses from disposer-pays
refuse services, rates or in combination with
disposer-pays include:

domestic kerbside recycling (collection


and processing)

resource recovery centre operation

domestic organic waste collection and processing.

illegal dumping enforcement

abandoned vehicle removal and disposal

litter collection and bin emptying

public place recycling

hazardous waste collection and disposal

advocacy

events

bylaw enforcement (costs that may not be


covered by waste operator licensing fees)

domestic refuse collection and disposal


to landfill

transfer station operation.

policy development and administration

subsidisation of Hauraki Gulf Islands


waste services.

Services considered to be for public good that


will be funded through the government waste levy
and/or Waste Minimisation Fund include:

kerbside recycling services for schools

a public education and behaviour change


programme

a community grants scheme

possible part-funding of an organic waste


(food waste only or food waste plus green
waste) collection.

51 It should be noted that all the funding methods apply only to the
17 per cent of the waste to landfill that the council influences.

Inorganic collections will be funded through rates.

2.3 Disposer-pays
Services funded through disposer-pays, or in
combination with private-good funding, include:

2.4 Hauraki Gulf


Islands
Because of their isolation and the higher cost of
service provision, the Hauraki Gulf Islands (HGI),
will be treated differently from greater Auckland.
These communities may receive reduced services
or, alternatively, their local boards may investigate
different ways of funding services.
This plan recommends subsidising services through
rates (at a level to be determined at a later stage,
but not to be less than the mainland) when all other
aspects of the services are determined. Until then
the current subsidy will remain in place.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

3 Financials
Waste and recycling services will cost
Auckland Council approximately $90 million in
2012/13 ($65million in rates-charging, $25 million
in disposer-pays charges and waste levy funding).
The cost of the proposed actions in the plan
is around $30 million, bringing the total cost of
services and facilities to $120 million (excluding
any costs for the Emissions Trading Scheme).
A key objective of introducing disposer-pays
is to make people more accountable for the waste
they produce. The suite of services offered in this
plan is forecast to have minimal rates impact
region-wide and minimal impact on total cost
of waste services to households. Households that
respond to waste minimisation programmes and
increase their use of recycling and organic waste
services should have lower costs for their
council-provided waste services.

Cost estimates in this plan are based on the premise


that 90 per cent of properties in the region come
under the same system (disposer-pays refuse,
private-good-funded recycling, private-good-funded
organic collections). Estimates would be subject to
change depending on the councils market share of
each activity within the system.
The following table provides a comparison of the
domestic waste and recycling systems the council
could provide and their potential impact on waste
reduction and rates across the region.

A key objective of introducing


disposer-pays is to make
people more accountable for
the waste they produce.

These notes and limitations refer to the table on the right.

Notes:

Limitations:

Options 2-11 include a biennial inorganic


collection (an added $3 million annually
over the status quo baseline).

Other inorganic options for consideration will


adjust the rates funding in the above options
by the following:

The figures are estimates only. Preparation


of both the Auckland Council Waste Assessment and
this plan has relied on information from multiple
sources including SWAP analyses from former councils,
the Auckland Regional Council Waste Stocktake and
Strategic Assessment 2009, permits, contracts, consents
and annual reports. The accuracy of these sources is
contingent on the best information available at the time,
and the degree of disclosure from the waste industry.

1.

a nnual collection requires an additional


$3 million over the biennial budget baseline

2.

a booking system will reduce the biennial


budget requirement by $2.4 million

3.

a further hybrid option for Waitakere, Rodney


and Franklin areas as booking systems with
the remainder as biennial will reduce the
requirement by $0.3 million.

The waste reduction targets reflect participation


rates which will be achieved after three years of
operation. The rate funding above reflects lower
initial participation rates.

Options 57 recognise that the green waste


component currently in refuse can be further
reduced by education and working with industry.

The impact of the Emissions Trading Scheme


and growth have not been factored in.

Financial analysis and modelling has relied on the


best financial information available at the time of
producing this plan.
The proposed way forward with a rigorous analytical
stepped process with continuous validation of
data and peer review will mitigate the potential for
discrepancies/errors in further waste management
and minimisation planning.

DRAFT WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 37

Table 1: Summary of estimated net rate requirement and waste reduction outcomes
of domestic waste and recycling service options (excluding GST)
Option

Disposer-pays charge
per lift

Net rate requirement


(estimate)

Waste reduction
(estimate)

1.Status quo (14/15) (currentsystem)


Excluding growth and inflation

45% of region pays for


refuse with disposer-pays

$72 million
(excludes Rodney)

0% (baseline)

PROPOSAL OPTIONS
Streamlined system with two bins - for refuse (120L bin) and recycling (Includes Rodney)
2. Disposer-pays refuse.

$3.00

$35.9 million

7%

3. Disposer-pays refuse.

$1.00

$73.5 million

7%

4. Rates funded refuse.

$0.00

$92.3 million

0%

Enhanced system with three bins - for refuse (80L), recycling and food waste
(in false bottom 60-litre bin, 23l capacity) (Includes Rodney)
5. Disposer-pays refuse.

$2.50

$70.5 million

30%

6. Disposer-pays refuse.

$1.00

$88.7 million

30%

7. Rates funded refuse.

$0.00

$107.5 million

10%

Enhanced system with three bins for refuse (80L), recycling and commingled
food/green waste options (in 60L bin with 30L capacity) (Includes Rodney)
8. Disposer-pays refuse.

$2.50

$72.2 million

30%

9. Disposer-pays refuse.

$1.00

$90.4 million

30%

10. Rates funded refuse.

$0.00

$109.2 million

10%

Option to add a 240l green waste service collected monthly, additional cost $12.7 million
11. Green waste only.

$0.00

$12.7 million

5%

Enhanced system with three bins for refuse, recycling and food waste (in false bottom 60L bin,
23L capacity) (Includes Rodney)
5a. Disposer-pays refuse no rural

$2.50

$69.5 million

30%

$2.50

$69.6 million

30%

$2.50

$66.4 million

30%

and HGI organic.


5b. Disposer-pays refuse no rural and
HGI organic, inorganic biennial except for
Waitakere, Rodney and Franklin region on
property booking and bags options in rural
and HGI.
6. Disposer-pays refuse fortnightly organics
(subject to low odour bin) no collection in
rural and HGI.

Please see the notes and limitations on the previous page.

PART C
Action plan

DRAFT WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 39

Vision:
To become the most liveable
city in the world, Auckland
will aim for the long-term,
aspirational goal of Zero
Waste by 2040, turning its
waste into resources.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

1 introduction to
the action Plan
This action plan outlines a six-year programme52 to
achieve the vision and targets presented in Part A
(although some actions will be ongoing). It includes
a funding structure, aspects of which will be updated
each year as part of the councils annual plan following
a period of public consultation, as required by the
Local Government Act 2002.
The plan will be reviewed within six years. Any
significant changes will be incorporated into the
councils Long-term Plan (LTP) process and subject to
public consultation.
The action plan has been designed to meet the
requirements of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008
(WMA) and the Local Government Act 1974, and 2002,
by including all practicable options to achieve the
councils waste minimisation objectives. These options
have been assessed in terms of their future social,
economic, environmental and cultural impacts on the
wellbeing of the city and its residents.

1.1 Strategic Context


This action plan draws on the strategic context of
Part A to determine specific actions and programmes,
and is focused on the long-term aspirational goal of
Zero Waste by 2040. As noted in section 2.1, Part A,
the vision of the waste management and minimisation
plan (WMMP) for the city is supported by the strategic
objectives below.

Vision:
To become the most liveable city in the world,
Auckland will aim for the long-term, aspirational
goal of Zero Waste by 2040, turning its waste
into resources.

52 It should be noted that the action plan includes both actions in
the 17 per cent of the waste to landfill that the council influences
and collaborative actions with the industry and business that the
council has an interest in, but does not control.

Strategic objectives:
reduce Aucklands reliance on landfills
achieve operational efficiencies in
domestic waste and recycling services

reduce harm from waste


restrict organic waste going to landfill
develop infrastructure and processes
to maximise resource recovery

reduce the councils responsibility for dealing



with end-of-life consumer products and


packaging through appropriate advocacy
maximise local economic development
opportunities (e.g. jobs created by
diverting waste from landfill)
reduce litter and illegal dumping
and related costs.

Targets
Given the opportunity to reduce the average
content of refuse bins or bags, the short to
medium-term target is:

to reduce domestic kerbside refuse by 30 per cent


by 2018. This means reducing domestic kerbside
refuse to landfill from 160kg per person, per year
to 110kg per person, per year by 2018 subject
to the full range of services in this plan being
implemented.
The council will mirror this reduction by undertaking:

to reduce the generation of its own in-house waste


by 30 per cent per capita by 2018 from 2012
baseline tonnages.
Depending on collaborative programmes with the
private sector and the outcome of discussions with
the waste industry, the following medium to
long-term (15 years) target is:

to reduce total waste to landfill (including


council and private-sector-influenced waste)
by 30 per cent by 2027 from a baseline of
0.8 tonnes per capita.

DRAFT WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

1.2 The Action


Plan process
This action plan is the result of the findings of the
Auckland Council Waste Assessment, preliminary
feedback on issues from local boards and other key
stakeholders53 and feedback from submissions in
the statutory consultation process.

1.3 Criteria for


identifying and
assessing options
The council has made decisions on methods and actions
in the WMMP in accordance with the Local Government
Act 2002, section 77. The following criteria have been
used for evaluating options54.
Environmental issues:

waste minimisation (e.g. volume of


waste reduction or diversion from landfill)

resource efficiency benefits


environmental harm
climate change related issues and impacts.
Social and cultural issues:

health and safety considerations (including public


health, staff and contractor-related issues)

public concern and interest


partnership and community involvement
the level to which producer and consumer
responsibility is supported.
Economic issues:

estimated whole-of-life cost


consideration of whether revenue is
generated by the initiative (where relevant)

other economic impacts, such as avoided


costs or other benefits to the council or
other stakeholders.

53 Auckland Council Waste Assessment: Appendix F Consultation.


54 A
 uckland Council Waste Assessment: 7.5-5 Options assessment
by waste stream and waste hierarchy.

I 41

2 Key METHODS
A comprehensive suite of actions has been developed,
to meet the councils legislative obligations and
work towards its Zero Waste goal. The actions have
been drawn from the former councils waste plans
(which were legally the Auckland Councils plan) and
were identified and evaluated in the
Auckland Council Waste Assessment and through
pre-statutory consultation with key stakeholders. They
include changes to funding methods and kerbside
services but also specific services to help schools,
businesses and the community reduce waste.
The list of actions/methods, with brief descriptions,
is included in sections 3.1 and 3.2.
The following key actions/methods are described in
more detail as they represent significant changes to
the way waste will be managed and minimised across
the region.

2.1 Standardise
funding methods for
domestic waste and
recycling services
Public-good, private-good and
disposer-pays
When discussing the funding of publicly provided
services, the council has made a distinction between
public-good, private-good and disposer-pays.
Public-good, used in the context of waste services,
generally refers to services provided for the public
in order to meet environmental policies and standards.
These services which benefit the whole community
cannot normally be linked to specific individuals
who use the service. Examples are litter services,
environmental promotion and education, enforcement
of illegal dumping, and hazardous waste services.
The cost of these services is generally met through
general rates.
Private-good often refers to services that meet
environmental policies and standards that are linked
to specific individuals kerbside recycling services, for
example. In most cases costs are met through general
rates or subsidised by other waste services or the

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

government waste levy. In some cases, however,


costs are legitimately met through a portion of
disposer-pays charging, reflecting both the community
and individual benefit derived from services (e.g. the
organic waste collection proposal).
Disposer-pays aligns closely with central
governments policy to provide financial disincentives
to minimise waste sent to landfill. As a consequence
there are areas where disposer-pays is the most
appropriate funding approach, such as for refuse
collections taken to landfill. Additionally, the legislation
allows local government to subsidise other
private-good services through any disposer-pays
services surpluses.
Rates versus disposer-pays
funding for refuse
When refuse services are funded through general rates,
all owners of rateable properties are sent a rates bill
based on the relative value of their property.
The money collected is put into a central pool and the
council decides where this money is spent.
A variation on this funding model is a targeted
rate. The money collected is earmarked for a
specific purpose and cannot be reallocated to
other things. The advantage of rates funding is
that it is straightforward. The council has existing
mechanisms for calculating charges and, because
rates are a charge against the property, debt
recovery is virtually assured.
The fundamental problem with residents paying
for refuse collection through rates (whether the
general rate or a targeted rate), is the lack of a direct
financial incentive to limit the amount of refuse they
generate. Those who separate recyclables receive no
economic benefit. Disposer-pays funding overcomes
this, providing residents with an incentive to reduce
the waste they generate, while also giving them the
power of choice: pay directly for waste, or reduce
and recycle and pay less.
This raises the question whether disposer-pays is
equitable. Large households that create a lot of
waste and do not use recycling services would be
likely to pay more through a disposer-pays system
than if they paid through rates. Similarly, tenants
in ratepayer-funded parts of the city who do not
currently pay directly for refuse collection would now
incur that cost. This could be a concern for parts of
the community already financially stretched.

However, rates-funded collection also has equity


issues. Small households (owner-occupied) pay
proportionately more, in effect subsidising large
households (living in similar size and value houses).
The council believes that with intensive, targeted
education programmes and enforcement, these
issues can be managed. In fact, they already have
been in parts of the city with similar socio-economic
demographics, where the change from rates to
a disposer-pays approach has been made.

Current situation
Residential properties
Kerbside refuse collections:
45 per cent of Auckland households pay through
disposer-pays (in the former North Shore, Rodney,
Waitakere, Papakura and Franklin areas) and
55 per cent pay through rates (in the former
Auckland and Manukau areas).

Kerbside recycling collections:


most households in the region pay through
rates. In the former Waitakere area this service
is treated as a private good and is subsidised
through surpluses derived from disposer-pays
refuse collection and transfer station charges
(the transfer station was owned by the council).

Inorganic collections:
households in the former North Shore,
Auckland, Manukau, Papakura and Franklin
areas pay for this service through rates.
Residents of the former Waitakere area pay
through a combination of subsidised
private-good funding and disposer-pays.

Commercial properties
Kerbside recycling collections:
commercial properties in the former Rodney,
North Shore, Waitakere, Auckland, Papakura and
Franklin areas receive a rates-funded, domestictype recycling service. Those in the former
Manukau area do not receive a service.

Kerbside refuse collections:


commercial properties in the former North Shore,
Waitakere, Papakura and Franklin areas receive
council-provided, disposer-pays refuse services
(for domestic quantities). Those in the former
Auckland area receive a rates-funded service.
There is no council-provided service in the former
Manukau area.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 43

Action:

Commercial properties:

The council will standardise funding methods


for domestic waste and recycling services for
residential and commercial properties across
the region, including:

disposer-pays funding of kerbside refuse


collections

private-good funding of kerbside recycling


collections for one bin with user-pays
charging for additional bins and/or
increased levels of service

private-good funding of kerbside organic


waste collections (if provided) for one bin
with user-pays charging for additional bins
and/or increased levels of service.

Residential properties:

disposer-pays funding of kerbside


refuse collections
private-good funding of kerbside
recycling collections
private-good funding of kerbside
organic waste collections
rates funding of inorganic services
public-good funding for services such
as litter collection, hazardous waste
and removal of illegal dumping.

Helping people adjust to change.

As a priority, the council will support the


changeover to disposer-pays charging
for refuse with an intensive community
development and engagement campaign
over the next three years, particularly
in those areas where refuse is currently
rates-funded and where pilots will be
undertaken, and in any other areas where
community engagement will assist in the
rollout of change.
D
 ue to the change for tenants in ratesfunded refuse collection areas, the
council will work with key stakeholders
to consider ways in which tenants with
lower socio-economic means might be
supported through this change.
diversion will be introduced,
Organics

together with larger dry recycling
bins, and a customer service Radio
Frequency Identification system (RFID),
before disposer-pays funding starts in
areas which are currently rates-funded,
so that people have the opportunity
to adjust to recycling and minimise
their refuse charge. The diversion
could be in multiple ways, including an
openness and encouragement of local
community green waste initiatives.
A
 transition programme will be
developed, starting in 2015, and lasting
a minimum of six months for the
introduction of disposer-pays, including
possible targeted rate adjustments in
the first year.

2.2 kerbside refuse


receptacles
Current situation
Residents of the former Auckland area
use 120-litre wheelie bins for kerbside
refuse collections.

Residents of the former Rodney,


Waitakere, Manukau, North Shore, Franklin
and Papakura areas use bags (or in some
case stickers). Disposer-pays wheelie bins
and bags are offered by private waste
contractors in these areas.
Instituting disposer-pays for refuse collected in
bags is relatively straightforward provide prepaid
bags or stickers.
Bin collection is slightly more complex, but the simplest
method is a weekly collection with a targeted rate related
to the size of bin chosen by the resident (the smallest
capacity bin incurring the least cost). Although residents
have an incentive to choose a smaller bin with this
method, they have no incentive to reduce waste below its
capacity, nor do they have an opportunity to reduce their
disposer-pays cost.
A better method from a waste minimisation perspective
is to use bins with Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)
tags which record the name and address of residents
and the credit held in their waste accounts. The tags
communicate with an RFID reader on the collection
vehicle and a record is kept of the number of bin lifts
chargeable to a particular householder55.
Using RFID tags on refuse bins (as well as recycling bins
and, potentially, organic bins) will also enable households
to monitor the amount of waste and recyclables they

55 Covechas reviewed, and concurs with,an initial analysis by the Information


Services Department at Auckland Councilonthe cost and feasibility of
charging fees for the collection of waste from bins equipped with RFID tags.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

put out for collection and how much they are paying
for refuse disposal56. Potentially residents will be able to
track their own details on a council website.
RFID tags will also enable the council to provide better
customer service to track down lost or stolen bins,
monitor contractor performance (e.g. investigate missed
pick-ups) and determine which parts of the city require
targeted waste minimisation education, advice and
assistance to help households minimise refuse costs.
Thetype ofpayment channels thatwillbe offered for
the kerbside collection servicewill be aligned with the
organisational-wide policies and standardsthatare
currently being developed by the finance business unit.
This will leverage off existing organisation-wide services
where investment has already been made.
As wide a range of payment channels as possible
willbe considered, for example:

website (credit card)

telephone Interactive Voice Recognition


(IVR) (credit card)

over the counter (cash, cheque, EFTPOS)


(e.g. at a supermarket or post office)

internet banking (bill payment or direct credit).

These can be either on a prepaid or on-account basis.


While payment via a prepaid system ishighlypreferable
to minimise debt collection costs, RFID prepaid
systemshave only fairly recently beenimplementedin
Europe, therefore aspects of the system will need to be
worked through before implementation.

Current estimates58 are that the cost per lift would


be around $2.5059 for an 80-litre bin (collected
fortnightly). The charge per lift will be commercially
competitive. This figure has been calculated using the
following assumptions about the revenue generated
from the per lift cost:

it will recover the full cost of refuse


collection and disposal

it will also provide some funding for the


kerbside recycling service

it may also provide some funding for the proposed


kerbside food waste collection (with possible
support from the waste levy).
The charges will be subject to a full economic analysis,
efficient procurement processes and to market forces.
They will be set annually through the annual plan or
three yearly through the Long-term Plan.
While wheelie bins will be introduced across all urban
areas of the city, a mixed bin and bag service will be
provided in rural areas and the Hauraki Gulf Islands
(HGI). This is to overcome difficulties householders
face in these areas with long gravel driveways, lack
of road frontages and other factors.
As organic waste would no longer be included in
kerbside refuse bins or bags (reducing both volume
and odour), collection of refuse would be fortnightly,
alternating with the recycling collection.
The restriction of organic waste going to landfill from
the domestic collection could be by way of a bylaw.

A change to an RFID systemwould be one of those


targeted for an extensive education programme.
Combining choice of bin size and prepaid per lift
charges allows the needs of different-sized households
to be met while also providing a strong incentive
to reduce waste. Several bin sizes can be offered to
residents, all with RFID tags57. The RFID records the
bin size with other details, and refuse charges are
calculated accordingly.

58 Based on economic modelling done by Covec, September 2011.


56 The proposal is for information to be made available
through an interactive website.
57 Bins used for current collections can either be on-sold or recycled.

59 Cost estimates are based on the premise that 90 per cent of properties
in the region come under this overarching system, and that costs would
change depending on the percentage of the council market share. Costs
exclude future ETS charges as levels are currently unknown.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 45

Action:
The council will introduce wheelie bins for

refuse across the urban parts of the city but


a mix of bags and bins in rural areas and the
HGI for refuse, with pricing to reflect the
added cost.

Council officers will:


work with the appropriate rural local
boards and communities to identify
the boundary between urban and rural
properties for the purpose of waste
collection
work with the urban local boards to
identify any narrow roads or particular
properties which may need tailored
solutions for the collection of bins
work with the councils Parks, Recreation
and Heritage Forum and the appropriate
local boards on how best to deal with
houses with no road frontage, scenic
spots, parks and holiday areas
work with local boards and communities
in rural and coastal areas where there may
be opportunities for drop-off areas.

The
 council will ensure it has the resources

to respond to particular situations of need


(e.g. disability, age, immobility) by working
with those people to deal with their bins
on a one-to-one basis, engaging neighbourly
support where possible.

A range of bin sizes for refuse will be


provided, from 60 to 240 litres.

collections will be fortnightly.


Refuse


Refuse charges for bins will be on a per


lift basis.

Customer service:

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) will be

used on all bins to improve customer service


and enable more efficient and effective
management of waste infrastructure.

A wide range of accessible options for

the pre-payment of refuse charges will


be made available.

2.3 Move towards


A consistent
domestic kerbside
recycling service
across the region
Current situation
Households in the former Auckland, Franklin,
Papakura and Manukau areas use 240-litre wheelie
bins for kerbside recycling, collected fortnightly.

Households in the former Waitakere and North


Shore areas use 140-litre wheelie bins collected
fortnightly.

Households in the former Rodney area use 55 and


70-litre crates collected weekly in urban areas and
fortnightly in rural areas.

In the former Waitakere, North Shore and Rodney


areas, paper and cardboard are collected separately.
In other areas all materials are collected in one bin
(commingled).
The rollout of a uniform kerbside recycling service
across the Auckland region will be implemented.
Existing contracts in the former North Shore and
Waitakere areas do not finish until 2015, so it will take
time to implement a uniform system across the region.
In the meantime, 140-litre bins with paper collected
separately will continue to be used in those areas that
currently have them. In Rodney, the contract using
crates for recycling will end in 2013. It is proposed
that the contract will be re-tendered with a change
to wheelie bin collections as soon as practicable. The
material collected from Rodney is currently processed
by Visy and it is considered that there will be capacity
to cope with the additional tonnage from wheelie bins.
However, given community and industry concerns
about commingled collections, an opportunity will
be given for some flexibility in the intended rollout
of this service.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

A pilot separate collection has been proposed by


industry in the former Rodney area by the
Auckland-based glass recycling industry which is
interested in retaining a higher value from collected
glass than commingled collection systems in
New Zealand can provide. The outcome of this pilot,
and further industry discussions, will be taken into
account before the contracts are retendered.
In addition, Auckland-based paper recyclers have
indicated their wish to consider the retention of
the existing separate paper collections.
Movement on either or both of these issues will
be dependent on the price gap between commingled
and separate collections being removed, or at no
net cost to the council.

Expand the range of recyclables


In all areas the range of recyclable materials collected
will be expanded to include:

all plastic codes 17


aluminium and steel (including clean aluminium
foil and empty aerosol containers)

glass bottles and jars


Tetra Pak milk and juice cartons.

The wider range of recyclables collected will


allow residents to reduce the amount of waste
they put in their refuse bin.
Disposer-pays funding for refuse should also
encourage recycling: around 15 per cent
(24,000 tonnes) of material put in Aucklands kerbside
refuse each year could be put in recycling bins
under this proposal.

Action:
The council will introduce larger recycling
bins across the region with a choice of bin
sizes (on request).

Commingled (paper, glass, plastics etc)


collections will be provided across the city.
Working with industry:

The council will work proactively and


collaboratively with operators to help expand
the markets for a wider range of recyclables.

The council will work with industry and


innovative business ventures to retain more
of the value of recyclable products (e.g. by
recycling used glass into new bottles instead
of into roading aggregate) either by closing
the price gap for separate collections, or by
other means.
Under these parameters, the suggestion of
a separate glass collection trial in Rodney
will be explored in consultation with Rodney
Local Board and residents, subject to
funding from industry.
Retaining the separate paper collection in
North Shore, Rodney and Waitakere will
be considered if the funding gap for that
separate collection can be closed before
the current collection contract expires.
on the outcome of the above,
Depending

negotiation with the industry will occur
on the option of a separate collection for
glass and for paper to be offered for all
urban areas, provided this proves to be
practicable and can be achieved at no
net cost to the council. This may include
a user-pays element.

The council will hold collaborative discussions


with the waste industry on innovative ways
to achieve the same waste reduction goal.
At the same time, it will liaise with the
industry to monitor any new technologies
to either reduce waste, or in the area of
waste to energy.

DRAFT WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 47

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

2.4 Introduce a
domestic kerbside
organic waste
collection
Organic waste, consisting of food or kitchen waste
(about 40 per cent of total kerbside waste) and
green (or garden) waste (about 10 per cent of
total kerbside waste) makes up over 50 per cent by
weight60 of domestic kerbside refuse in the Auckland
region. Diverting this material would make a major
contribution to the councils short to medium and
long-term goals. It would also provide householders
with a service to help reduce the amount they pay for
disposer-pays refuse.
The council will introduce a regular, rates-funded
kerbside collection to divert organic waste from
household refuse. The type of waste collected
(food waste only or food waste plus green waste),
the method of collection and processing, and the
frequency of collection will be determined through
the procurement process.
Private operators already provide domestic green waste
collection services (generally using 240-litre wheelie
bins or 600-litre bags). Whatever option is chosen,
the council will ensure that the effect on the green
waste industry is minimised. Some initial options and
estimated costs for organic collections are discussed
further in Part D, Appendix 4 of this plan.
They include:
Food waste only

60-litre wheelie bin with false bottom. Automated,


weekly collection.
Food waste plus some green waste

60-litre wheelie bin. Automated, weekly collection.


Separate green waste and food waste

60-litre food waste collected weekly and


240-litre green waste collected monthly.
Both automated collections.

60 A
 uckland Council Waste Assessment Appendix C: Composition and
tonnage of Auckland Councils kerbside residential refuse collection. Waste
Not Consulting 2010. This has a plus or minus margin of error
of approximately 5 per cent.

From a waste hierarchy perspective, diverting organic


material from landfill by collecting and processing
it is preferable to disposal. However, diversion is
less desirable than beneficial activities like home
composting, or not creating organic waste in the first
place. This is particularly relevant, as it is estimated that
one-third of all bought fruit and vegetables are thrown
away. Therefore, this plan proposes an intensive drive
to encourage and incentivise home composting and
reduction of food waste in the first place.
Some residents do not throw out organic waste, but
compost or worm farm it at home, feed it to animals,
or put it down an insinkerator and would therefore not
need to use the service. The council will work on ways
of valuing their contribution.
If it recovered 75 per cent of all organic material
currently being disposed of to landfill (from both
council and private domestic kerbside collections), a
food waste collection has the potential to reduce waste
to landfill by approximately 70,000 tonnes annually61
and a combined food waste/green waste collection has
the potential to divert up to 85,000 tonnes annually.
The processing method used would depend on whether
food waste or food waste combined with green waste
was collected. The processing options are wider with a
food waste only collection, and there may be potential
to produce end products, such as stock feed and liquid
fertiliser, as well as compost.
If compost proved to be the best solution (combined
or single stream collections) this would increase the
amount of compost available in the Auckland region.
Those involved in the sale of compost have indicated
that the Auckland residential compost market is near
saturation. Initial cost modelling for the organics
collection has therefore excluded any return from the
sale of end product. This means the retail price for
compost can be adjusted to increase market demand
or in fact, to create new markets. The council needs
to undertake further economic analysis on the whole
proposal, and would work with the organic processing
industry to develop long-term stable markets for the
additional compost that would become available if
composting was chosen.
The Ministry for the Environments 2007 State of the
Environment Report62 notes a loss of organic matter
from cropping soils in New Zealand. The most
promising markets for compost from Aucklands

61 Auckland Council Waste Assessment Appendix C: Report 2.


62 Environment New Zealand 2007. p 239.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 49

organic waste are therefore expected to be the


agricultural and horticultural areas on either side of
Auckland. Use by Auckland Councils Parks and Reserves
unit would also be an option, and for sporting facilities
and turf applications.

Action:
The council will divert the organic
component of the waste stream that
is currently going to landfill.
A regular rates-funded kerbside collection
of organic waste will be introduced in urban
parts of the city.
The method of diverting the organic waste
will be determined at the procurement phase
of the process, to see what proposals the
market presents.
The councils governing body will:

set the criteria for the choice of method


for diverting organic waste
overview the procurement process for
the diversion of the organic waste.
The council will:

set appropriate criteria for choosing


the method of diverting organic waste,
recognising the existing waste industry, but
that the councils overall aim is to maximise
the overall green waste recovery
carry out trials to find the right solution for
Auckland for diverting organic waste
hold exploratory discussions on potential
collaboration with other councils including
Environment Bay of Plenty and Waikato
Regional Council
intensify and incentivise composting
education and explore community initiatives,
including suggestions raised in submissions
develop ways of valuing or acknowledging
those who already home compost
explore ways in which the community and
voluntary sector and iwi/Ma-ori organisations
can divert green waste from landfill.
There will be no provision of kerbside organic
collection service to the HGI and rural areas. The
Solid Waste Unit will work with the relevant local
boards, community organisations and residents on
ways to reduce organic material (especially food
waste) going to landfill by alternative methods.

2.5 Regional
inorganic collection
Current situation
Kerbside inorganic collections are provided in
the former North Shore, Auckland, Manukau and
Papakura areas on an annual or biennial basis.

A drop off system is provided in the former Franklin


area and a booking system (with material collected
from within residents properties) is provided in the
former Waitakere area. No service is provided by
the council in the former Rodney area.
Although most councils in New Zealand do not provide
inorganic collections and they are rare in overseas cities,
they have been operating in some parts of Auckland
for years. While recognising that they have negative
impacts (such as health and safety issues for collectors
and the public, mess, security issues, damage to reusable
items through scavenging, illegal dumping and providing
a disincentive to product stewardship), the council
acknowledges they are popular with some parts of
the community. The council will therefore provide an
inorganic collection across the region until a better way
to retrieve more recyclable and reusable items can be
provided. Such an alternative would be likely to involve
the resource recovery network described in section 2.6.
One of the main things council has considered when
deciding on the options is whether collections should
take place from the kerbside or from within residents'
properties (as occurs in the west of Auckland). The latter
has many advantages because it reduces the negative
impacts associated with kerbside collections and has
the added benefit of being able to retrieve more items
intact that could be recycled or reused.
A kerbside system would need to have a shorter set
out period before collection and be more rigorously
monitored to deter illegal dumping and commercial
scavenging, and to mitigate some of the negative
impacts associated with those systems.
Detailed analysis of the advantages and disadvantages
of the various inorganic collection systems can be
found in Appendix F of the Auckland Council Waste
Assessment, Issues Paper 3.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

A brief summary of some of the options and


estimated costs are provided in Appendix 4 of
this plan and include:

Recovering more resources:

1. an annual kerbside collection


2. a biennial (once every two years) kerbside collection
3. an annual collection from within residents'
properties operated via a booking system

4. no collection resource recovery centres only.

Action:

The council will develop a range of more


effective systems for the recovery of
inorganic material. The council will provide
one rates-funded, on-site booked inorganic
collection per year for every ratepayer from
2015 onwards, as well as local places within
the resource recovery network where people
can drop off inorganic material at other times.
Kerbside inorganic collections will be phased
out as the new systems are put in place.
From 2012-2015 the council will:
p rovide a rates-funded inorganic
collection across the region
provide an improved biennial kerbside
inorganic collection in the former legacy
areas which currently have a kerbside
collection, with shorter set out times and
stricter enforcement
the annual inorganic on-site booking
retain

system in the former Waitakere area but
with an improved methodology to divert
more resources. The service will be ratesfunded
offer an on-site annual inorganic booking
system in the legacy Franklin and Rodney
areas and in the Hauraki Gulf Islands
develop ways to respond to domestic
inorganic material from commercial areas.

Kerbside inorganic collections


will be phased out as the new
systems are put in place.

The council will start work to explore:


the
 potential to extend resource recovery
systems progressively across the region
provided by and for business and the
community
which appear to be successful
initiatives

in resource recovery such as Secondhand
Sundays, Freecycle and garage sale networks
initiatives for sports, charity
fundraising

and groups like Guides or Scouts
the
 introduction of a booking system in
discussion with local boards which are
keen to develop resource recovery centres
and work to improve resource recovery
systems.
The remaining local boards will be given the
option of considering the introduction of an
annual on-site booking system instead of a
biennial kerbside collection, before a regional
on-site booking system is introduced.

2.6 Develop a
Resource Recovery
Network (RRN)
The Zero Waste goal calls for an infrastructure that
supports maximum resource recovery. The resource
recovery network (RRN) provides such an infrastructure.
The idea of a region-wide network of resource recovery
parks, developed for the former Auckland councils in
200563, came with a recommendation for seven large
resource recovery park hubs linked to up to 60 smaller
community recycling depots. The idea was to develop
the RRN in stages and fund it through savings made
by cancelling inorganic collections, imposing a regional
landfill levy (this was before the national waste levy
was introduced), and the sale of recovered materials.
It was estimated that this infrastructure, supported
with appropriate policy and an electronic stock control
and trading system, could divert as much as
25 per cent of material going to landfill within five years
and create new jobs and business opportunities through
the expansion of the recovered materials industry.
63 A
 uckland Council Waste Assessment Appendix F: Reclaiming
Aucklands Resources: A Resource Recovery Network for the
Auckland region. Envision New Zealand Ltd. 2005.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 51

A resource recovery park hub was proposed for each


of the former council areas, using existing, redesigned
transfer stations where appropriate. Small scale
community recycling depots would be located within
communities owned and operated by the private
sector, community enterprises or the council. The
concept could not proceed further at the time, due
to the fragmented nature of the region and lack of
council ownership of facilities.
With the new council in place, the idea of a resource
recovery network where businesses could drop off
sorted materials and residents could drop off items at
smaller scale community recycling depots is still seen
as helpful for reducing waste to landfill but may take
some time to put in place.
Many positive ideas on resource recovery came
through the submissions from the community,
iwi/Ma-ori and industry.
The council wishes to build on
these ideas and this energy and will engage proactively
to help facilitate progress.

Organic waste processing facility


A 2009 investigation into diverting organic material64
from landfill in the Auckland region identified the need
for a processing facility supported by two organic
waste transfer facilities. The transfer stations would
ideally be located at resource recovery parks. On the
assumption that a processing facility would need to be
on suitably zoned land, close to end-product markets,
south Auckland and the Waikato were identified as the
most likely locations. The organic waste collected from
southern parts of Auckland would be delivered directly
to the processing facility and organic waste from other
areas would be consolidated at facilities located, ideally,
in north Auckland and in the south/central area. If
compost was the end product, and food waste only is
collected, a certain amount of green waste would also
be required to facilitate processing.
As the method of diverting and processing
organic waste is not yet decided, the need for
additional processing facilities is not yet known.
This will be reconsidered in conjunction with
the procurement process.

64 Investigation into options for beneficial processing of


food waste. Morrison Low and Associates. July 2009.

Timing
Although the RRN (potentially including an organic
waste processing facility) is a medium to longer-term
project, the resulting infrastructure will allow Auckland
to sort and process a far greater range of materials,
including construction and demolition, hazardous,
household inorganic and organic waste.

Many positive ideas


on resource recovery
came through the submissions
from the community,
iwi/Ma-ori and industry.
Action:
The council strongly supports this concept as it is
an essential component to achieving the goals of
the New Zealand Waste Strategy and the purpose
of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008.
The council will coordinate a collaborative
dialogue with industry, the community/
voluntary sectors and iwi/Ma-ori organisations
to explore the following areas:
how the council might support existing
community and business recycling
initiatives more actively (such as their
inclusion in an interactive website giving
information about recycling businesses)
including existing centres
new resource recovery initiatives both
how

by the community/voluntary sector,
iwi/Ma-ori organisations and by business
might be nurtured
to build on the energy and passion
how

from submissions
how interest from the existing network
of refuse transfer stations might be
developed.
A network of drop-off points for hazardous
waste will be developed, and the Hazmobile
service will be phased out.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

2.7 Support business


particularly in the
construction and
demolition industries
The council will support business waste minimisation
through a number of initiatives, particularly in the
construction and demolition industries. The proposed
RRN would provide the infrastructure (in tandem with
privately owned facilities) to enable businesses to drop
off reusable and recyclable materials for processing and
sale (for reuse or remanufacturing). On-site support is
also proposed, with the council working with businesses
to reduce waste outputs and broker the exchange
of reusable and recyclable materials between waste
producers and recyclers or reusers.
Support will also be provided through a communications
programme and promotion of existing online waste
reduction guides and resources such as REBRIs
(Resource Efficiency in the Building and Related
Industries) waste reduction tools65 and the
Green Star66 building accreditation programme.
In addition, the council will investigate establishing
demonstration projects to encourage the use of
recovered materials in construction projects, as well
as acknowledging businesses that successfully reduce
construction and demolition waste.
For business in general, the council will support
programmes such as Eco Smart and Conscious
Consumers67 and improve the efficiency of the RENEW
waste exchange68, which supports redistribution
between those businesses with industrial by-products or
surplus materials, and those businesses or people who
can use them. A waste ranger service is also proposed,
to provide hands-on help to areas with high waste
outputs (such as businesses in CBDs).

Action:

The council will support business waste


reduction, particularly in the construction
and demolition industries, by providing the
infrastructure and/or support industry to
recover, reuse and recycle materials and by
actively working with businesses to reduce
waste and facilitate the exchange of reusable
and recyclable materials.
The council will publicise on its website and
elsewhere, the availability of services that
provide for the reuse and recycling of products.

2.8 Advocate for


product stewardship
Product stewardship, sometimes called extended
producer responsibility (EPR), is a policy approach
that aims to ensure producers and consumers take
greater responsibility for the environmental costs
of the products and packaging they produce and/or
consume. As such, product stewardship shifts the main
responsibility for recovery, recycling and disposal from
local government to private industry, incorporating costs
in the product price. The focus is on keeping products
and packaging from entering the waste stream and
facilitating design that promotes recovery and recycling.
Products commonly targeted by such schemes include
packaging, batteries, disposable nappies, solvents, tyres
and electronic goods; although in theory, any product
may be managed in this way.
The WMA promotes product stewardship and makes
provision for the introduction of voluntary and
mandatory schemes. However, to date, no mandatory
schemes have been introduced and voluntary schemes
(successful as some have been) are limited in their
effectiveness69. Voluntary schemes currently exist in
New Zealand for glass packaging, agricultural chemicals
(and packaging), used oil and paint.

65 Hosted by BRANZ. www.branz.co.nz/REBRI


66 A
 programme of the New Zealand Green Building
Council. www.nzgbc.org.nz
67

www.consciousconsumers.org.nz
69

68 www.renew.org.nz

Changing Behaviour: Economic instruments in the Management of


Waste: Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. (Preface).

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 53

One of the best known mandatory product


stewardship schemes is Container Deposit Legislation
(CDL), which places a small deposit, typically 10 or
20 cents, on beverages such as soft drinks, wine, beer,
milk, fruit juice and water. The deposit is refunded
when empty containers are returned to recycling
facilities. The scheme operates successfully around
the world and significantly increases recycling rates
(typically 70 to 90 per cent70 compared to 30 to
40 per cent currently in New Zealand71).
If CDL were introduced, substantial savings would
be seen on kerbside collection and litter clean up, as
well as a reduction in environmental harm caused by
containers entering waterways and the sea. CDL can
only be introduced at a national level so Auckland
Council would need to advocate for its introduction.
Some parts of industry oppose CDL, arguing that it
will undermine current recycling programmes72 or
that it will be too expensive to operate73.
Other problematic waste streams for which product
stewardship schemes could be introduced include
electronic waste (computers, televisions, etc.), tyres
and batteries all of which pose a significant threat
to the environment when disposed of incorrectly.
Collection and consolidation points could be provided
at RRN facilities.
The 2013 changeover from analogue to digital
television makes a product stewardship scheme for
televisions an urgent matter (there will be an influx
of obsolete equipment). The council will also support
any proposals which address the growing number of
discarded tyres74, such as a proposed collaborative
scheme being developed by industry.

70 Changing Behaviour: Economic instruments in the Management of


Waste: Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. (Preface.)
71 The Incentive to Recycle: A Container Deposit System for
New Zealand. Envision NZ Ltd. 2007.
72 The Incentive to Recycle: A Container Deposit System for
New Zealand. Envision NZ Ltd. 2007.
73 P otential Impacts of the Waste Minimisation (Solids) Bill: Update
report. Covec. 2008 and National Container Deposit Scheme Impacts
prepared by Australian Economist Consultancy ACIL Tasman on behalf
of the Australian Food and Grocery Council in September 2011.
74 Tyre Track a voluntary scheme has wound up due primarily to a
number of the smaller tyre retailers not joining the scheme and some
of those who had, not reporting all their tyre movements (MWH 2004
End of Life Tyre Management: Storage Options-report to MfE from
Auckland Council).

If CDL were introduced,


substantial savings would be
seen on kerbside collection and
litter clean up, as well as a
reduction in environmental harm
caused by containers entering
waterways and the sea.
Action:
The council strongly supports the concept of
product stewardship (in line with the WMA) for
all products.
The council will collaborate with the private
sector on new voluntary product stewardship
schemes as a first step, but maintains the
right to advocate for mandatory product
stewardship for that product if significant
measurable progress is not made in reducing
that waste to landfill.
The council will advocate for the introduction
of Container Deposit Legislation (CDL) (as
an effective means of dealing with the costs
of collecting recyclables, as well as offering
significant community benefit) subject to
further discussion with industry.
The council will include product stewardship
ideas raised in submissions for review and
potential collaboration between the council
and the private sector.
The council will encourage industry and
advocate to the government to develop
solutions for products that need priority
attention such as:
nappies and incontinence pads exploring
effective, affordable self funding services
TVs
(especially during the digital TV

changeover)
tyres
construction and demolition waste
batteries


e-waste.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

2.9 Advocate for


amendments to the
Waste Minimisation
Act 2008
The purpose of the WMA is to encourage waste
minimisation and a decrease in waste disposal, and
the act requires the council to promote effective and
efficient waste management and minimisation within
its district. Because Auckland Council only influences
approximately 17 per cent of the regions waste, its
ability to carry out this responsibility is limited and
will remain so unless it either gains more influence
over the waste stream, or industry is given the same
responsibilities as council.

The purpose of the WMA


is to encourage waste
minimisation and a decrease
in waste disposal.
Following discussions with industry, the council
proposes to advocate for amendments to the WMA
that would give industry the same obligations as local
authorities to reduce waste to landfill. This advocacy
would not affect the councils ongoing discussions
with the waste industry around ways for the council to
obtain greater influence over the waste stream. Neither
would it affect any of the actions outlined in this plan,
which are predominantly directed at the 17 per cent of
the waste stream that the council currently influences.

Action:

The council will advocate to the government


to amend the waste legislation to apply
the same responsibility for waste reduction
to industry as currently legislated for local
government.

2.10 Facilitate
local enterprise
There are many examples around New Zealand
that show how, with council support, local enterprises
(businesses, community groups, etc.) can play an
important role in achieving their communities
waste reduction objectives75.
The council proposes to explore new initiatives that,
once established, can be transferred to local enterprises
to operate. In effect, the council is proposing reverse'
BOOT (build, own, operate transfer) schemes, where the
council would develop initiatives and local enterprises
would be the recipient operators76. (In normal BOOT
schemes the private sector builds, owns and operates a
facility and then hands it over to the public.)
Opportunities for such schemes, once the resource
recovery network is established, range from operation
of recycling depots to producing new products from
recovered materials. There may also be opportunities
to transfer services such as the proposed sell on behalf
of service for reusable items (described in section
3.1.9) and delivery of waste minimisation education
and communication programmes. Product stewardship
programmes may also offer opportunities for the council
to develop systems and/or provide access to facilities
for example, for used oil (for which the council is already
running a pilot project), electronic waste, etc.
Facilitating the involvement of local enterprises in waste
minimisation and resource recovery initiatives aligns
with Auckland Councils Draft Economic Development
Strategy, particularly with the strategys focus on
innovation, a business-friendly and well functioning city,
growing local skills and jobs and creating a sustainable
eco-economy.

Action:

The council will investigate and develop


initiatives that will enable local enterprises
and mana whenua involvement in resource
recovery and waste minimisation activities.

75 F or example the Community, Business and Environment Centre


(CBEC) in Kaitaia www.cbec.co.nz
76 A
 uckland Council Paper to the 2011 WasteMinz conference.
Product Stewardship: Balancing up the Responsibility.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 55

2.11 Investigate enacting 2.12 Hauraki


a waste Bylaw
Gulf Islands
A waste bylaw may be required to implement aspects
of this plan and may include (amongst other things):

regulating the deposit of waste and


diverted materials

regulating kerbside collection and transportation


of waste and diverted materials through
licensing of waste operators

regulating access to waste management


and minimisation facilities provided, owned
or operated by the council

prohibiting the disposal of diverted material


to disposal facilities

controlling litter and providing receptacles


for litter in public places.
The bylaw may also address issues such as unsolicited
advertising material, shopping trolleys, clothing bins,
multi-unit dwellings and abandoned vehicle.

The bylaw may also address


issues such as unsolicited
advertising material,
shopping trolleys, clothing
bins, multi-unit dwellings and
abandoned vehicles.
Action:

The council will investigate developing


and enacting, by 31 October 2012, new
regional waste bylaws that support the
intent of this plan.
In this context, the council will investigate
a cleanfill regulation.

The provision of waste services in the Hauraki Gulf


Islands (HGI)77 is much more expensive than on
the mainland due to the islands isolation and the
expense of shipping materials offshore for disposal or
recycling78. Although the higher average costs need
to be addressed, it is acknowledged that charging the
full disposer-pays cost for waste services would be
prohibitive for island communities. Nor is itpractical
to consider each island in isolation,especiallygiven
the large number of holiday makers and boats that
visit. It is thereforerecommendedthat theHGI be
considered as an entity and that a uniformamount
is charged for disposer-pays refuse bags or bins. This
would enable a much fairer distribution of costs;
that is, boat owners, visitors and residents would all
make their contribution. One option would be for
Hauraki Gulf-specific, prepaid refuse bags to be made
available at marine stores, bait shops and garages
throughout the region, as well as on the islands (and
potentially for kerbside collections) and for them to
be able to be dropped off at designated facilities on
and off the islands and potentially on waste barges79.
Waiheke Island residents could also use wheelie bins
with RFID tags to facilitate disposer-pays charging.
Preliminary engagement with local boards has
indicated that due to the different logistical issues
on each of the islands, local boards in the Hauraki
Gulf should have a larger say in the waste services
provided, and have input into how they could be
funded. The council will decide in conjunction with
local boards for recommending to the governing
body how much of the cost of waste services should
be imposed through disposer-pays charging and
how much should be subsidised from region-wide
public-good funding (i.e. general rates). This plan
recommends subsidised services through rates at a
level to be determined later, when all other aspects
of the services are determined80. Once this has
been established details of specific services and
infrastructure requirements can be addressed.

77 Waiheke, Great Barrier, Rakino and Kawau Islands.


78 A
 uckland Council Waste Assessment Appendix F: Issues paper 5:
Geographically Remote Areas Waste Management and Resource
Recovery.
79 The council will investigate and discuss with the local community
ways of dealing with existing refuse barges.
80 With the proviso that charges are not less than the mainland.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

The current level of subsidy provided to the islands is


about $2.2 million or about 60 per cent of the actual
cost of providing the service.
Whichever services are provided, they must support
the vision and goals of the region. An important step
will be to work out how to remove organic material
from the waste stream. Local collection and processing
solutions could be developed, the shape of which will be
determined by the level of disposer-pays refuse charging.
A key principle will be to try to keep organic material on
the islands. Another will be to ensure all waste assets are
managed appropriately to comply with resource consent
and legislative requirements.
Current contracts on Waiheke Island expire in 2019, so
changes to service provision before then would only be
possible with agreement from both parties.

Action:
Further work will be carried out together
with local boards (Waiheke, Great Barrier and
Rodney) to determine the level of service
provision on the Hauraki Gulf Islands and
the level of disposer-pays charging and level
of subsidy for refuse, with the final decision
resting with the governing body.
The council will:

introduce a mixed disposer-pays bag and


wheelie bin collection for refuse
develop a workable, accessible system for boat
users to enable a disposer-pays system to
work effectively
explore opportunities for local resource
recovery initiatives in collaboration with
residents, industry, the community/voluntary
sector and the local boards in order to
maximise reuse and recycling, and to retain as
much material as possible on the islands
ensure all waste assets on the islands are
managed appropriately to comply with
resource consent and legislative requirements.

2.13 Implement a
Strategic Framework
for Communication,
Waste Minimisation
Programmes
and Community
Development
A strategic framework for communication, waste
minimisation programmes and community
development81 has been developed to support
implementation of this plan. Its aim is to encourage
widespread uptake of the proposed changes to
collections and services, and to promote everyday
actions to reduce waste. The framework will provide
high level direction for communication campaigns,
education, community engagement and community
development activities, ensuring a cohesive, targeted
package is delivered to the region82. Local boards and
key local organisations will be sounding boards for the
effectiveness of such campaigns, and in some cases
will be actively involved.
How communities deal with waste is influenced
by many factors, including household size, the
cost of waste disposal, home ownership status, the
convenience of collection services, knowledge of how
to reduce, reuse and recycle, and cultural norms and
location. These factors will influence the way in which
communities respond to any proposed service changes
and how successfully those changes are adopted.
The experience of councils in Auckland and around
New Zealand shows that with the right support,
communities can easily reduce the waste that goes
to landfill.

81 Community development is the process of helping a community


strengthen itself and develop towards its full potential.
82 It should be noted that framework includes both actions in the 17 per cent
of the waste to landfill that the council influences and collaborative
actions with the industry and business that the council has an interest
in, but does not control.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 57

Figure 5: Strategic framework for waste minimisation

Aim

Towards Zero Waste


To raise awareness and encourage change in waste practices at home,
at work and in the wider community to reduce waste going to landfill
Community development

To motivate people to adopt


waste wise behaviour through
education and targeted
engagement programmes

To empower people to manage


and minimise their waste, at a
community and business level

Whole community,
targeted areas

Households, businesses,
schools

Community organisations,
targeted households, business

- Television
- Community based social
marketing
- Recycling and resource
exchange website
- Social media
- Phone applications
- Printed collateral (information
packs, calendars, brochures)
- Market research

- Household visits Waste Rangers


- Personalised waste plans
- Business programmes/
certification
- Experiential learning
- Curriculum linked education
- Waste resources and systems
- Community learning centres
- Workshop and presentations
- Evaluation

- Community based
resource networks
- Social enterprise
- Business partnerships
- Place based community
driven projects
- Business incubation
- Action learning

Objectives

To raise awareness and provide


information about major service
changes and waste wise
behaviour through social
marketing and information

Audience

Waste minimisation programmes

Tools

Communications

Innovative programmes - community education - partnerships - new services

For the purposes of this plan, waste wise behaviour


comprises the regular actions Aucklanders can take
to better manage and minimise their waste. Besides
separating and recycling, people can avoid waste in
the first place through their consumption choices,
composting, mulching garden waste, and using waste
exchange and resource recovery services. The diagram
on the next page (Figure 6) shows the full range of
actions people can take and many Aucklanders
are already taking them. The aim of this plan is to
encourage the whole community to do so.

Strategies to support change


in the community
Communities vary in their ability to adapt to
change and in the support they require to do so.
Implementing this plan requires empowering people
to minimise the waste they produce and thereby
reduce the cost of disposal. To ensure this, household
and community engagement programmes will target
areas with a higher proportion of large households,
renters and other groups. The council will work closely

with local community groups and networks to provide


the information and support needed before, during
and after the introduction of new services.

Community-based social marketing


As indicated in the strategic framework above, three
streams of activity will support the introduction of
new services and foster waste wise behaviour in the
community communication, waste minimisation
programmes and community development. Until
recently, the term education was applied to all
communication, information and engagement
programmes for waste minimisation. While education
can help raise awareness of a problem, it is less reliable
in fostering change in peoples daily behaviour. There
is often a gap between what people know, what they
intend to do and what they actually do. Techniques
such as community-based social marketing (CBSM),
developed specifically to address this gap, have been
used successfully elsewhere to foster waste wise
behaviour. While education will remain an important
part of the plan, CBSM will be used in the design

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

Figure 6: Everyday waste reduction actions


Establish and
maintain compost,
bokashi or worm farm
Mulch lawn clippings
and garden waste
Separate and correct
set out of organic
Buy only as much fresh food
waste
as needed, reuse left-overs
Separate and correct set
out of recycling
Avoid, recycle and
reuse construction
and demolition waste

Organics

ti o
r u c li ti o
t
s
n
Co
o
em
and d

Li
eg tter
a
al
du n d
mp
ing

H az

Buy products with


recyclable packaging or
no packaging at all

n d Pa p e
r
p
a
cka
gi n g

Buy economy sized


products, concentrates
and refills

a rd
ou

Handle, store and dispose of


hazardous waste safely

s
Inorganics
a n d s p e cial

Avoid and reduce the use


of hazardous substances

Put litter in its place


secure your rubbish

ill

Refuse set out and


secured
Use waste
exchanges and
brokerage
services

Separate and
book inorganic
collection
Separate and
drop off of
hazardous and
special waste

Join extended producer


responsibility and
industry accreditation
programmes

Trade, gift
Buy products
and exchange
with extended
reusable goods
producer
responsibility or
waste reduction
credentials

of waste minimisation programmes, and be one of


the underpinning parts of education, communication,
community engagement and empowerment activities.

Communication
Innovative and engaging campaigns will be developed.
They will include a set of consistent and clear
waste-wise messages. Campaigns will play an important
part in supporting the rollout of new services, and will
link to education and support activities.

Education
Curriculum-linked programmes within schools build
understanding and create a sense of responsibility
around waste. Schools are also focal points within
communities and young people are important role
models for parents and wha- nau. The WasteWise schools
programme will continue and be expanded to more
schools across the region.

Community engagement
Direct engagement with households and communities
through household visits, workshops and other activities
is an important way to encourage waste-wise behaviour
at home. Targeted community engagement programmes
will help communities implement practical waste
minimisation solutions at home.

Community development
A community development approach may be most
effective in some communities, where service changes
are likely to have more impact. This means engaging
with groups such as NGOs, trusts and the volunteer
sector, who know their communities well and have
strong networks and experience in communicating with
local people. Programmes that build capacity in specific
communities and have social, economic, environmental
and cultural outcomes will be explored in order to
develop community understanding, involve people in
solutions and create lasting change.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 59

Business partnerships
Businesses are an intrinsic part of our communities,
providing social and economic support. Work and
home practices are closely linked. It is proposed
to continue working with small-to-medium sized
businesses under existing programmes and to explore
ways to strengthen these relationships. Partnerships
with business associations and industry groups, will
be key.

Evaluation and research


An evaluation framework will be developed to track
the progress of the communication, education and
community development activities in this plan, and
continually improve them.

Action:

The council will implement a continued


and intensive community education,
engagement and community
development programme during and
after implementation of the plan.
Consideration will be given to the use
of more than the official five languages
(given the multi-cultural nature of
Auckland) when reaching into particular
communities.
Targeted programmes will be developed
and implemented to assist and inform
communities on how to reduce waste.
The council recognises that community
education, engagement and development
are not one off or one-size-fits-all
processes they need to be ongoing
and linked to other council programmes
as much as possible.
The council will work in partnership
with the active network of communitybased organisations focused on waste
reduction in the engagement and
education aspects of the rollout and
ongoing implementation of the plan.

Specific actions are described in section 3.2.

3 Actions and
Implementation
As discussed in part A of this waste management and
minimisation plan (WMMP), the formation of
Auckland Council represents both a significant challenge
and a unique opportunity for waste minimisation in
the region. Part A shows how the present system is
structurally unlikely to deliver the waste reduction
outcomes required under the councils new strategic
direction, and central government legislation. A step
change is required. To this end, this plan includes the
following actions as the best means of charting a
course towards Zero Waste.
The actions have been developed to ensure that
waste management and minimisation is effective and
efficient, and reduces potential for public harm, as
required by the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA).
By adhering to the waste hierarchy model, the actions
will also maximise the economic potential of the
Auckland regions waste stream.
Under the plan, actions will be implemented over a
short to medium timeframe. They will drive changes
in behaviour, efficiencies in waste management and,
ultimately, a significant reduction in waste per capita.
They will not only align waste and recycling outcomes
with legislative requirements, but will also help
Auckland reach its goal of becoming one of the
most liveable cities in the world.
Sections 3.1 and 3.2 list the full range of actions
the council will take towards its short to medium
and long-term goals with a brief detail/description,
funding method and timeframe for implementation
added.
Actions fall into two broad categories:

1. policy and operations


2. communications and waste
minimisation programmes.
Policy and operations actions describe how the council
will change and implement services across the region.
Communications and waste minimisation programmes
actions provide the support needed to ensure the
success of the changes, along with ongoing programmes
for businesses, schools, and the community.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

RESIDENTS AND VISITORS are ABLE


TO RECYCLE IN PUBLIC AREAS.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 61

3.1 waste policy and


operational actions
Waste Policy Actions
3.1.1 Standardise funding methods for domestic waste and recycling services
Action

Detail/Description

What this will mean


for households

Timeframe

Residential properties:
Fund kerbside refuse
collections through
disposer-pays

Disposer-pays funding will be introduced for


kerbside refuse collections across the region.
Refuse charges will be set to cover more than the
cost of collection and disposal of refuse to landfill,
with the surplus used to fund waste reduction and
recycling initiatives in accordance with Section
46 of the WMA.

Residents will pay directly for the waste they


produce and will have an incentive to reduce
the amount they put out at the kerbside.
Charges will be commercially competitive.

2015
(July onwards)

Fund kerbside recycling


collections through
private-good funding

Private-good funding of kerbside recycling


collections means the costs of this service will be
paid for through rates, surpluses generated from
disposer-pays refuse charges, waste levy funds or
a combination of these methods.

Kerbside recycling services will appear free to


residents as there will not be a direct charge.
As a result, residents will have an incentive to
recycle as much as possible to reduce the cost
of refuse disposal.

2015
(July onwards)

Fund organic waste collection


through private-good charging
Fund regional inorganic
collection through rates

Subject to a procurement process, an organic


waste (food waste only or food waste plus green
waste) collection will be tested and implemented.
The service would be private-good funded
(supported through rates, surpluses generated
from disposer-pays refuse charges, waste levy
funds or a combination of these methods).

Because there is no user-charge for the service


there will be an incentive to put organic waste
in the organic waste bin rather than the refuse
bin and thus reduce residents refuse volumes.

2015
(July onwards)

Fund regional inorganic


collection through rates

Inorganic collections will be funded through rates.

Residents will not pay any direct disposer-pays


charge for this service.

2015

Fund litter collection services,


public recycling, hazardous
waste services and removal
of illegal dumping through
public-good funding

All litter services (collection of loose litter,


emptying litter bins etc), public recycling services
and illegal dumping enforcement will be paid for
through public-good funding (rates).

Residents will not pay any direct user charges


for these services. As they are classified as a
public-good they will be funded through rates.

2015
(July onwards)

Fund kerbside domestic-type


refuse collections through
disposer-pays

Disposer-pays funding will be introduced for


kerbside refuse collections in areas where they
are currently rates-funded. Refuse charges will be
set to cover more than the cost of collection and
disposal of refuse to landfill, with the surplus used
to fund waste reduction and recycling initiatives
in accordance with Section 46 of the WMA.

Businesses will pay directly for the waste they


produce and will have an incentive to reduce the
amount they put out on the kerbside.

2015
(July onwards)

Fund kerbside domestic-type


recycling services through
private-good funding

Private-good funding of kerbside recycling


collections means the costs of this service will
be met through rates, surpluses generated from
disposer-pays refuse charges, waste levy funds or
a combination of these methods. If businesses
require additional bins or collections, requests will
be considered on a disposer-pays basis.

Standard kerbside recycling services will appear


free to businesses as there will not be a direct
charge. As a result businesses will have an
incentive to recycle as much as possible to
reduce the cost of refuse disposal.

2015
(July onwards)

Fund kerbside domestic-type


organic waste collection
through private-good funding

An organic waste (food waste only or food waste


plus green waste) collection would be privategood funded (supported through rates, surpluses
generated from disposer-pays refuse charges,
waste levy funds or a combination of these
methods).

Because there is no user-charge for using the


service there will be an incentive to put organic
waste in the organic waste bin rather than the
refuse bin.

2015
(July onwards)

Commercial properties:

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

3.1.2 Advocate for legislative change


What this will mean
for the region

funding
method

CDL is seen as an effective means of dealing


with the costs of collecting recyclables,
as well as offering significant community
benefit. It would significantly increase the
number of beverage containers recovered
and recycled in Auckland and would reduce
kerbside collection and litter costs. It cannot
be implemented regionally so would need
to be introduced as a nationwide scheme
by central government. The council can
advocate for its introduction on the basis
that it is a scheme that transfers the majority
of the costs of recovery and recycling from
ratepayers to producers and consumers,
in keeping with the intent of the WMA.
Opposition from some parts of industry will
be reviewed before advocacy starts.

When purchasing a beverage, consumers


would pay a small deposit, which would be
refunded when they return the container
to a recycling centre. Recycling rates would
increase, leading to less litter and reduced
waste and recycling service costs. Depending
on how the scheme was administered there
would be opportunities for small businesses
and community enterprises to run collection
depots.

Public-good
funded

2012 ongoing

Encourage industry
and advocate to
the government to
develop solutions
for products that
need priority
attention such
as nappies and
incontinence pads,
TVs (especially
during the digital
TV changeover),
tyres, construction
and demolition
waste, batteries and
e-waste

Electronic waste, tyres and batteries pose a


significant threat to the environment when
disposed of incorrectly. Product stewardship
schemes would ensure they are recovered
and recycled, or disposed of correctly.
Collection and consolidation points could
be provided at RRN facilities. Nappies (and
incontinence pads) and construction and
demolition waste contribute significantly to
the amount of waste going to landfill.

Residents would be able to dispose of these


products in an environmentally responsible
manner. There will be less need for inorganic
collection services and less waste would
be put in kerbside refuse collections.
Manufacturers will have more incentive to
design products for recovery and recycling.

Public-good
funded

2012 ongoing

Advocate for
amendments to
the WMA to give
industry the same
waste minimisation
obligations as local
authorities

It is estimated that around 30% of material


going to landfill could be diverted to
beneficial use (recycling, composting, etc.),
yet there is no legal imperative for industry
to reduce waste to landfill. Amending
the WMA to give industry the same
responsibilities as local authorities would
significantly reduce the amount of waste
sent to landfill.

The amount of waste sent to landfill


would decrease significantly and Auckland
would move much faster towards its Zero
Waste goal.

Public-good
funded

2012 ongoing

Action

Detail/Description

Advocate for the


introduction of
Container Deposit
Legislation (CDL)
subject to further
discussion with
industry

Timeframe

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 63

3.1.3

investigate enacting a waste bylaw

Action

Detail/Description

Investigate
developing and
enacting a waste
bylaw by 31
October 2012 to
support the aim and
intent of this plan

Existing bylaws expire on 31 October 2012.


Development of a bylaw may be required if
it is determined to be the most appropriate
method of regulation. In accordance with
Section 56 of the WMA:
(1) A territorial authority may make bylaws
for one or more of the following purposes83:
a.

prohibiting or regulating the deposit


of waste

b.

regulating the collection and


transportation of waste

c.

regulating the manner of disposal of


dead animals including their shortterm storage pending disposal

d.

prescribing charges to be paid for


the use of waste management and
minimisation facilities provided, owned
or operated by the territorial authority

e.

prohibiting, restricting or controlling


access to waste management and
minimisation facilities provided, owned
or operated by the territorial authority

f.

prohibiting the removal of waste


intended for recycling from receptacles
provided by the territorial authority by
anyone other than:

What this will mean


for the region

funding
method

A bylaw will help ensure households and


businesses use waste and recycling systems
correctly, so they do not present a hazard or
inconvenience to others. Alongside intensive
education programmes the council will have
the ability to ensure that those who do not
act responsibly are penalised.

Public-good
funded

2012 ongoing

Public-good
funded and
fees from
licensing
operators.

2012 ongoing

Timeframe

The proposed waste bylaw would consider


requiring both community-based and
commercial waste industry and waste
reduction organisations to provide relevant
information of a non-commercial nature
for monitoring purposes and community
education.

i the occupier of the property from


which the waste in the receptacle
has come; or
ii a person authorised by the territorial
authority to remove the waste.
(2) A bylaw must not be inconsistent with
the territorial authoritys waste management
and minimisation plan.
The bylaw may also address issues such as
unsolicited advertising material, shopping
trolleys, clothing bins, multi-unit dwellings
and abandoned vehicles. It could also
consider a significant increase in the littering
and illegal dumping fines.
Investigate
developing and
enacting a cleanfill
regulation

Investigate, draft and adopt a bylaw


prohibiting disposal of certain construction
and demolition materials in landfills and
cleanfills, and regulating cleanfills.

83 Waste Minimisation Act (2008) section 56

Reusable and recyclable material will be


diverted to beneficial use.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

Waste Operational Actions


3.1.4

Move towards consistent domestic waste and recycling services across the region
What this will mean
for households

funding
method

Timeframe

Residents will be offered a range of


wheelie bin sizes for refuse from 60 to
240 litres (one per dwelling). Wheelie bins
will be manufactured with RFID tags that
automatically debit the residents prepaid
account when the bin is emptied. Different
charges will apply for emptying different
sized bins. Collection will be available
fortnightly on a specified day, but residents
who do not put their waste out will not
be charged. Bins will not be emptied if the
resident's account does not have sufficient
credit (although some discretion is expected
in the transition time). A waste account
will be created for all residents (one per
dwelling).

Residents will be able to manage their


waste costs through choice of bin size and/
or frequency of collection. They will be able
to choose the bin size that best meets their
households needs but the smaller the bin,
the less they will pay. A fortnightly collection
service will be offered, but residents can
choose to put their bin out less frequently.

Disposer-pays

2015

Introduce a
disposer-pays mixed
bag and wheelie
bin service for
rural areas and the
Hauraki Gulf Islands

A disposer-pays mixed bag and wheelie bin


kerbside refuse collection will be provided
in rural areas and the Hauraki Gulf Islands.
Residents will have the option of bin size and
capacity ranging from 60 to 240 litres.

Rural residents and Hauraki Gulf Island


residents will be able to use prepaid bags
for refuse. They will also have the option
of an RFID-tagged wheelie bin (of varying
capacity). Charges will reflect the added cost
of the service, and on HGI will be partially
subsidised.

Introduce a
council-provided
collection service in
the former Rodney
District Council area

A disposer-pays bin service would be offered


in urban areas of Rodney and a mixed bin or
bag service in rural areas.

Action
Kerbside refuse
collection
Introduce wheelie
bins in urban areas
for those areas that
currently use bags

Kerbside recycling
collection
Introduce larger
wheelie bin and
expanded range of
materials

Detail/Description

Residents will be offered a range of wheelie


bin sizes from 140 to 360 litres (one per
dwelling). Recyclable materials will be
collected fortnightly. The range of materials
collected will be expanded to potentially
include all plastics (codes 17), aluminium
and steel (including clean aluminium foil and
empty aerosol containers), glass bottles and
jars, and Tetra Pak milk and juice cartons.

Residents will have more choice in bin size


and can choose one that best fits their needs.
The wider range of materials accepted means
more material will be able to be diverted
from residents refuse bins, reducing refuse
disposal costs.

Roll out a fully


commingled
service across
the region (once
existing collection
and processing
contracts expire)

The recycling service will be commingled


across the region. However, if industry can
close the funding gap for separate collection
of glass and/or paper and there is no net
cost to the council, there is potential for
these materials to be collected separately.

Households would be able to put all materials


in one bin with a fully commingled collection.
With separate collections an additional
receptacle may be required.

Trials for separate


glass and paper
collections will be
carried out subject
to industry funding

Further details in section 2.3

2015-2019

Private-good
funded

2015

2012
onwards

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 65

Kerbside organic
waste collection
Introduce a new
collection for
organic waste (food
waste only or food
waste plus green
waste)

Pilots will be carried


out to find the
right solutions for
Auckland
Inorganic collection
Introduce a regional
collection for
inorganic waste

Residents will be provided with a service


for diverting organic waste from refuse,
which would be private-good (rates) funded.
Residents who have an alternative for
private disposal to beneficial use (e.g. home
composting, bokashi, feeding to animals,
insinkerator, etc.) can continue using
alternative methods and will not need the
new service.

This will be a new service for residents. It will


provide an opportunity to reduce the amount
of residual waste they put in their refuse bin
by up to 50%. The service will be privategood funded.

Private-good
funded

Further details on trials in section 2.4

Up until 2015 residents will be able to


dispose of one cubic metre of inorganic
material every one or two years. The council
will monitor and enforce the collection
system as well as illegal dumping and
commercial scavenging to minimise negative
impacts. The existing booking system for
Waitakere will continue with an improved
methodology and rates funding. After 2015
the council will provide an annual on-site
booking service along with resource recovery
facilities to drop off goods and materials
outside of the collection period.

2015

2012
onwards

Residents will eventually have access to


a system that enables them to dispose of
goods and materials in a way that maximises
resource recovery.

Rates-funded

2015

Exploratory work
will be carried
out on extending
potential resource
recovery systems,
successful resource
recovery initiatives
and fundraising
initiatives

Further detail in section 2.5

2012
onwards

Work with local


boards to discuss
potential for
resource recovery
centres and
review inorganic
collections

Further detail in section 2.5

2012
onwards

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

3.1.5 Services for the commercial sector


What this will mean
for the region

funding
method

Businesses, in some of the former councils,


were offered household kerbside refuse
and recycling services. These services will
continue while an investigation into future
service provision is undertaken.

There will be no disruption to services while


the council investigates options.

Public-good
funded

2012-2015

Introducing RFID-tagged wheelie bins


for domestic collections would give the
council the ability to offer the same suite
of services to businesses, with the potential
for increased collection frequency. Refuse
collection would be on a disposer-pays basis,
and recycling would likely be private-good
funded for one bin, with disposer-pays
charging for additional bins. Organic waste
collections, if provided, would likely be
provided on a similar basis. The investigation
would determine what demand there is
for the services and how they would be
implemented (including receptacle type,
etc.). Special consideration would be
given to the needs of businesses in central
business districts.

Businesses would have access to services


that allow them to sort and recycle their
non-trade waste (e.g. from lunchrooms,
offices, etc.). Although they would pay for
additional recycling services (over and above
those provided through the targeted rate)
this would be less than refuse collection
charges, providing an incentive to recycle.
Providing consistent recycling services at
home and work will help reinforce the waste
minimisation message throughout the region.

Public-good
funded
(investigation)

2012/2013
(investigation)

Disposer-pays
funded for
refuse

2015
(implementation)

Action

Detail/Description

Continue to provide
household kerbside
collection services
to businesses that
currently receive
them
Investigate options
for providing
household kerbside
collection services
to businesses (i.e.
for non-trade
waste) throughout
the region

Timeframe

Private-good
funding for
recycling and
organic waste
collections

Investigate and
develop ways
of responding
to domestic
inorganic material
from commercial
properties

Further detail in section 2.5

Public-good
funded
(investigation)

2012
onwards

Publicise reputable
businesses that
provide for reuse
and recycling of
particular products
on its website and
elsewhere

Further detail in section 2.7

Public-good
funded

2015

3.1.6 Multi-unit properties


What this will mean
for the region

funding
method

The council will work with the Waitemata


Local Board and any other interested local
boards, developers, the waste industry
and residents, to find solutions for waste
management and minimisation services for
multi-unit dwellings. Guidance material will
be made available and practical assistance
provided from the waste rangers service.

Occupants of multi-unit properties will be


provided with the same level of waste and
recycling services offered to other residents
in the region. The council will enable body
corporates to provide their own service
solutions.

Public-good
funded

2012/2013

The council will ensure that the unitary plan


and waste bylaw stipulates that adequate
handling and storage systems for waste and
recyclable materials must be designed and
constructed in new multi-unit properties.

Adequate waste and recycling systems will


be available and easy to use for building
occupants.

Public-good
funded

2012/2013

Action

Detail/Description

Develop services
for multi-unit
residential
properties (10 or
more units)

Ensure handling and


storage systems for
recyclable materials
are provided in new
multi-unit
residential
developments

Timeframe

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 67

3.1.7

Provide kerbside recycling collections for schools

Action

Detail/Description

Offer schools a
council-provided
recycling service
and programme

There are approximately 560 primary,


intermediate and secondary schools in the
Auckland region. All will be offered wheelie
bins to enable them to participate in
kerbside recycling. A collaborative process
with the private sector will be initiated
to work out, if possible, a complementary
service delivery model to best support the
needs of schools. Other services will be
considered.

What this will mean


for the region

funding
method

Timeframe

All schools will be able to participate in


council-run kerbside recycling collections. As a
result there will be significant increase in the
amount of recyclable materials recovered.

Waste levy

2012 ongoing

What this will mean


for the region

funding
method

Timeframe

3.1.8 Develop a Resource Recovery Network


Action

Detail/Description

Develop the
resource recovery
network (RRN)
infrastructure

The concept of a resource recovery network


is a longer-term project. Strategically located
resource recovery parks and recycling
depots could provide local facilities to
maximise the diversion of waste from landfill.
They would support a range of initiatives
including organics collection, inorganic waste
processing, construction and demolition
(C&D) waste drop-off and processing,
hazardous waste drop-off and reusable goods
drop-off and resale. The RRN could make
these initiatives more cost effective and
convenient for the public and businesses.
It would have to be developed in stages. As
the first stage the council will coordinate
a collaborative dialogue with industry, the
community/voluntary sectors and iwi/Ma-ori
organisations. Further detail in 2.6.

Greater opportunities for resource recovery


will be provided to residents. When the RRN
is fully developed, businesses and residents
will have access to facilities where they can
drop off and purchase a wide range of used
goods and materials. The RRN will provide
services to residents whenever they need
them not just when a collection is occurring
(e.g. for hazardous waste, inorganic material).
Small businesses and community enterprises
could possibly run recycling depots.

Private-good
funded and/
or other
mechanisms
such as
the Waste
Minimisation
Fund

2013 ongoing

Establish hazardous
waste drop-off and
handling capacity at
resource recovery
facilities

The development of a network of drop-off


points for hazardous waste, and a
phasing out of the Hazmobile service.

When resource recovery facilities are


operating residents will be able to drop off
hazardous material (batteries, chemicals, etc.)
at resource recovery facilities at any time
not just when there is a collection.

Domestic
public-good
funded.
Commercial
disposerpays

2012 ongoing

Establish facilities
for construction and
demolition (C&D)
recovery within the
RRN

Large scale facilities for collecting and


processing C&D materials could be
developed as part of the RRN. Links will be
developed with existing private operations
and with organisations involved in promoting
C&D waste reduction. The council does not
intend to be in competition with current
C&D recovery businesses but (similar to the
green waste industry) will collaborate to
maximise C&D recovery and will potentially
plug gaps in logistics or locations.

Residents and businesses will be able to take


unwanted or waste materials to a facility
near them for sorting and recovery. The
facilities will provide feedstock for private
businesses dealing in recovered materials.

Private-good
funded and/
or other
mechanisms
such as
the Waste
Minimisation
Fund

2012 ongoing

Link an enhanced
waste exchange/
waste brokering
service with the
RRN

Enhanced internet-based waste exchange/


waste brokering services will be developed
to link with the RRN and provide a way to
advertise and sell materials collected through
the RRN.

Private and commercial customers will be


able to easily locate or sell used goods and
materials anywhere in the region without
physically going through the RRN.

Private-good
funded

2012 ongoing

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

3.1.9 Increase diversion of reusable items


Action

Detail/Description

Pilot a councilrun sell on behalf


of service for
unwanted items
of value

Most residents have items of value they


dont want. Many of these are disposed of
via the inorganic collection simply because it
is the easiest option. One solution is for the
council to offer a sell on behalf of service to
complement the inorganic booking service
(which would mainly deal with items of no or
low value) for those people who did not want
to take the time and energy to use current
services such as Trade Me. A specialist team
would identify and collect items suitable
for sale through a trading website or other
means. The council would take a commission
from the sale with the proceeds returned to
the residents or a charity.

3.1.10

What this will mean


for the region

funding
method

Residents would have a way to dispose of


goods and materials that might otherwise
accumulate on their properties or be disposed
of via the inorganic collection. Although many
people sell goods and materials via trading
websites, there are many who, for a variety of
reasons, cannot, or do not wish to do so.

Private-good
funded

Timeframe
2012-2014

Foster new ideas and support community waste minimisation initiatives


What this will mean
for the region

funding
method

The council will explore initiatives to enable


local enterprises and mana whenua to
participate in resource recovery and waste
minimisation activities. Opportunities
will emerge for local enterprises with the
development of the resource recovery
network and through initiatives such as
the sell on behalf of service for unwanted
items, product stewardship schemes,
and community education programmes.
Opportunities will also be explored to use
indigenous knowledge to support research
into indigenous waste practices and to
support Ma-ori communities developing
innovative solutions for their communities.

Supporting local enterprise and mana whenua


by facilitating opportunities for involvement
in resource recovery and waste minimisation
initiatives will engage the community
and increase local economic development
opportunities.

Public-good
funded

2012 ongoing

Establish a grants
scheme to support
community
initiatives
focused on waste
minimisation

Some of the former Auckland councils


ran grants schemes for community
waste minimisation initiatives. Auckland
Council will build on these models and
develop a funding scheme framework to
support community initiatives that reduce
waste to landfill. The scheme will have a
$500,000 funding pool and will be open to
business, the community/voluntary sector
and iwi/Ma-ori organisations. The council
could complement this by applying for
additional funds from the Ministry for the
Environments contestable funding pool.
The criteria for the fund will be focused
on the seeding of new initiatives including
developing business and community-based
resource recovery centres and programmes.

Small grants will support the development of


local waste minimisation initiatives and foster
new ideas and community buy-in. Clear
funding criteria, a requirement for measurable
waste reduction and good case studies will
ensure funds are used efficiently. Initially
a small political subgroup of the council
will be set up to allocate funds under the
grants scheme.

Waste
levy and
application
to the Waste
Minimisation
Fund

2012
(development
of funding
scheme
framework)
2013 ongoing
(provision of
scheme)

Support competitions
that encourage
secondary school
and tertiary
students to develop
innovative solutions
to intractable waste
challenges

The council needs to demonstrate its


openness to new ideas and responsiveness
to the creativity and talent of young New
Zealanders. Support would be provided to
competitions to encourage lateral thinking
around some of the intractable waste
challenges. Competitions could be run in
partnership with central government and the
private sector.

The region is likely to benefit from new


creative entrepreneurial thinking on
intractable waste problems.

Application
to the Waste
Minimisation
Fund/partial
sponsorship

2013

Action

Detail/Description

Investigate and
develop initiatives
that will enable
local enterprises
and mana whenua
involvement in
resource recovery
and waste
minimisation
activities

Timeframe

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 69

3.1.11

Public place recycling and events


What this will mean
for the region

funding
method

Continued support for public place recycling


to be delivered in the most cost effective
way, including the provision of public
recycling bins to encourage people to recycle
when they are away from home. Local board
input will be sought on the installation of
new bins. Alternative funding options will be
investigated to cover the cost of servicing
bins. Consistent wording on bins will be used
across the region.

Residents and visitors will be able to recycle


in public areas as they do at home, reinforcing
the waste minimisation message.

Public-good
funded

2012 ongoing

Work towards all


events organised by
the council and on
council properties
to be run as Zero
Waste events

Work towards all events organised by the


council or held on council properties and
parks to be run as Zero Waste events
meaning they will be planned in such a way
that as little waste as possible goes
to landfill.

Recycling facilities will be provided at all


events and waste minimisation will be
considered during event planning.

Public-good
funded

2013 ongoing

Develop a consistent
framework for waste
minimisation and
litter prevention
at events

A framework for waste minimisation and


litter prevention at events will be developed.
This will include development of guidance
material and supporting public information.

Event organisers will have access to clear


guidance and support.

Public-good
funded

2012/2013

Action

Detail/Description

Provide public place


recycling bins

3.1.12

Timeframe

Manage and reduce litter and illegal dumping


What this will mean
for the region

funding
method

Some of the former councils provided a


loose litter collection service. Auckland
Council will provide a consistent service
across the region.

Litter will be managed consistently across the


region, leading to a cleaner environment.

Public-good
funded

2012 ongoing

The council will adequately resource litter


and illegal dumping abatement. Extra
enforcement measures will sit alongside
the communication and community
engagement programmes planned.
The council has adopted a new litter
infringement schedule. In addition to
enacting a waste bylaw, the council can:

Residents will enjoy a cleaner, litter-free


environment. Litter collection and disposal
costs (funded through rates) will be reduced.

Public-good
funded and
licensing fees

2012 ongoing

Action

Detail/Description

Provide consistent
loose litter
collections across
the region
Actively enforce and
control littering and
illegal dumping

appoint warranted litter officers


and litter wardens

advocate for container


deposit legislation

run an education and


awareness campaign.

Timeframe

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

3.1.13 Hauraki Gulf Islands


What this will mean for the
Hauraki Gulf islands (HGi)

funding
method

The council will carry out further work with


HGI local boards (Waiheke, Great Barrier
and Rodney) to determine the level of
service provision and the level of disposerpays charging and subsidies with the final
decision resting with the governing body.
The level of the charge should not be less
than on the mainland.

There may need to be a trade-off between


refuse charges and service level provision.

Public-good
funded

2012/2013

Introduce a mixed
disposer-pays
bag/wheelie bin
collection service
for refuse

A choice of prepaid refuse bags or disposerpays wheelie bins will be provided on HGI.

Residents will have the choice of using bags


or bins for refuse. Both will be disposer-pays.

Disposerpays and
public-good
funded

2013-2015

Develop a workable,
accessible system
for boat users to
enable a disposerpays system to
work effectively

A system will be developed, to ensure boat


users pay their share of refuse disposal costs.

Boat users will pay their share of the waste


services they use, reducing the burden on
island residents. Disposer-pays will provide an
incentive to reduce the amount of
waste produced.

Disposerpays and
public-good
funded

2013-2015

Investigate and
establish organic
waste diversion and
processing systems
on Waiheke and
Great Barrier islands

Organic collection and processing systems


will reduce the amount of refuse sent to
landfill by up to 50%. The type of systems
established will depend on the level of
disposer-pays charging for refuse. Processing
will be undertaken on-island.

Residents and holiday-makers will be able to


reduce their waste disposal costs by using
organic recycling systems. Islanders will have
access to locally produced compost and/or
mulching materials.

Private-good
funded

2013-2015

Explore
opportunities for
local resource
recovery initiatives
on the islands in
collaboration with
residents and local
boards in order to
maximise reuse
and recycling and
to retain as much
material as possible
on the islands

Opportunities for developing local resource


recovery facilities and finding local uses for
locally recovered materials will be explored.

Materials would not need to be shipped off


the islands. Opportunities for local job and
business creation may be developed.

Private-good
funded

2013-2015

Ensure all waste


assets are managed
to comply with
resource consent
and legislative
requirements

All assets, including Claris landfill on Great


Barrier Island, will be managed so they
comply with all consent and legislative
requirements.

The life of waste assets will be maximised,


reducing future costs to ratepayers across
the region.

Public-good
funded

2012 ongoing

Action

Detail/Description

Determine level of
service provision
and level of
disposer-pays
charging for refuse

Timeframe

DRAFT WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 71

THE EDUCATION CHILDREN


RECEIVE INFLUENCES
THEIR WORLD VIEWS AND
BEHAVIOUR AS ADULTS.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

3.1.14 Corporate Responsibility Walking the talk


What this will mean
for the region

funding
method

Timeframe

Auckland Council has an important role: to


demonstrate good waste-wise practice in its
own operations. The council will therefore
commit to reducing waste from its own
in-house activities by 30% per capita by
2018. The target initially applies only to
normal office waste. Waste arising from
other council activities will be incorporated
progressively in consultation with affected
operational departments. The results of
the waste reduction programme will be as
transparent as possible, and included on
the councils website to demonstrate its
willingness to walk the talk. The progressive
implementation of waste reduction
programmes and targets is regarded as an
obligation on council-controlled organisations
(CCOs) through their Statements of Intent.

The council will adopt best practice in its own


operations and provide a model for other
organisations in the region. Support will be
provided from politicians and staff towards
the in-house waste reduction programmes.

Public-good
funded

2012
ongoing

The council and its CCOs will include clauses


relating to minimising waste and using
recovered materials (where practical) in
contracts for council building, maintenance,
demolition and infrastructure projects.

As a large organisation, the council has the


potential to stimulate demand for local
recovered and recycled materials
(e.g. crushed concrete, compost, etc.).

Public-good
funded

2012 ongoing

What this will mean


for the region

funding
method

Reporting and monitoring will be considered


a part of the profile and consciousness raising
on the need to reduce waste. The council
being transparent about its own waste
reduction will be an upfront way of standing
alongside the community in its efforts.

Public-good
funded

2012

The website would promote businesses


that provide solutions. It would also enable
residents to check on their individual or a
local board and others progress, to gain
comprehensive information on their area.

Public-good
funded

2012
onwards

Action

Detail/Description

Reduce in-house
council waste by
30% per capita by
2018 from 2012
baseline tonnages

Promote waste
minimisation
and the use of
recovered materials
in its contracts

The council will also encourage local reuse


where possible.

3.1.15

Monitoring and reporting

Action

Detail/Description

Develop and
implement a
monitoring and
reporting system to
measure progress
towards targets

Gathering accurate information on how


services are performing is essential for
monitoring progress towards targets and
planning for future demand. The council
will develop clear and transparent
monitoring and reporting systems.
Key areas that require monitoring include
level of service, compliance (with legislative
requirements and regulations), waste
reduction and diversion.

Timeframe

Data will be gathered through community


satisfaction surveys, council records (KPIs
etc), annual Solid Waste Analysis Protocols
(SWAPs) and through the provisions of the
waste bylaw. See Appendix 2 for further
details.
Initiate development
of a multi-functional
interactive website

A multi-functional interactive website will


be developed as a key part of reporting
progress and helping communities and
businesses divert recyclables and find
waste reduction solutions, and to provide
data gathered through the RFID system.
Any new waste bylaw policy development
should include consideration of whether the
council can require both community-based
and commercial waste industry and waste
reduction organisations to provide relevant
information of a non-commercial nature for
monitoring purposes and for community
information.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 73

3.2 Communications and Waste


Minimisation Programmes
Households (WasteWise Neighbourhoods) and Community
The following actions are proposed to communicate with, educate and empower households. These actions will be developed
further within an integrated, community-based, social marketing framework. All actions are funded by government waste levy
funds and public-good funding for the first four years of the plan and then through a mix of public and private-good funding.

3.2.1 Kerbside Refuse and Recycling Collections Support change in service


Action

Description

Timeframe

Change
communications
to affected areas

Develop a high visibility social marketing campaign to all households affected by any service changes.
Learn from experience of other regions campaigns, including Reduce Your Rubbish and Big Clean Up. Likely
methods to include: media, printed material, billboard, TV, radio, community information line, applications
for SMART phones, prompts and reminders (calendars, stickers, kitchen caddies), social media and a new,
dedicated waste website.

2012-2015

Targeted community
education

Develop a programme to encourage communities particularly those with English as a second language,
those who currently put out a lot of refuse, or those that may struggle with a direct refuse cost to adopt
waste wise behaviour before, during and after the transition to disposer-pays. The programme will be developed in consultation with these communities and draw on lessons from the existing targeted community
education programme. Likely methods include local training and employment opportunities, waste ranger
household visits, workshops and presentations.

2012 ongoing

3.2.2 Kerbside Organic waste collections Support new service and ongoing waste-wise behaviour
Action

Description

Timeframe

Intensify
programmes to
encourage uptake
of composting
options.

Intensify programmes to encourage and incentivise the uptake of onsite and home composing across
the region. Composting programmes will encourage conventional composting, worm farming, bokashi
and low waste gardening practices. A range of tools will be used to engage the community, including
workshops, home visits, online tuition, information and incentives. The programmes will also be promoted
to small to medium businesses across the region and link to business engagement initiatives such as
Conscious Consumers.

2012-2015

Targeted community
education

Develop a community-driven programme for targeted areas to encourage uptake of organic waste
collections, composting and other organic waste reduction activities.

2012-2015

Food waste
prevention

Develop new programmes focussed on minimising food waste through purchasing, storage, planning
and preparation, and reuse actions. This could include involvement in the Love Food Hate Waste
programme being implemented in Australia currently, which includes community campaigns and
business partnerships. The programme has multiple outcomes, targeting organics recycling as well
as improved community wellbeing. Likely tools include supermarket tours, competitions and
community workshops.

2012-2015

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

3.2.3 Other Waste Management and Minimisation Services



support and ongoing behaviour change
Action

Description

Timeframe

Waste rangers for


households

Develop a household programme encouraging good practice behaviour for recycling, organics, avoidance,
reduction and disposal of inorganic, hazardous, special waste and used goods. Likely methods include
household visits, waste information and audits. Build on lessons from current operational activity and focus
on priority areas. Pilot with 500 households before expanding to region.

2012 ongoing

Reusable nappy
programme

The council will continue delivering the existing programme, supporting options available to parents to
reduce the number of disposable nappies they put out in household refuse. The council will explore ways
to expand and intensify efforts to keep parents well informed on solutions for waste reduction. Broaden the
scope and method of delivery to include working in partnership with hospitals, birthing centres and
day-care centres for reusable alternatives.

2012 ongoing

Community-based
e-waste recycling
programme

Develop community-based programmes for reuse and recycling of inorganic and special waste and reusable
goods. Feasibility studies are needed to assess opportunities for community involvement and to partner
with existing national programmes such as the RCNs Community Electronics Recycling. Link to product
stewardship schemes in longer term.

2013

Recycling depots

Develop a programme to support the establishment of recycling depots and social enterprises linked to
the resource recovery network. The aim will be to build community capacity to minimise waste, develop
community-driven projects and generate local employment. Feasibility studies are needed to assess the
economic opportunities.

2014 ongoing

Research and
evaluation

Baseline research to better understand community values, understanding, attitudes and behaviour in regard
to waste, in order to support programme development, social marketing campaigns and ongoing evaluation
of the effectiveness of council interventions.

2012 ongoing

3.2.4 Litter and illegal dumping


Action

Description

Timeframe

Develop anti-litter
campaigns based
on the review of
existing programmes such as
Be a Tidy Kiwi

Be a Tidy Kiwi is a public information campaign aimed at reducing litter. Although widely known,
its effectiveness in achieving behaviour change is unknown. This programme will be reviewed to
determine its contribution to waste minimisation, and for any potential rebranding.

2012 ongoing

'Beautify your
neighbourhood
litter and rubbish
campaigns

Draw on the experience of successful campaigns such as Beautify Your City. Run targeted social
marketing campaigns to change litter, illegal dumping and other non-conforming behaviour in
targeted public places in particular strip shopping streets and shopping centres.

2012 ongoing

3.2.5 Waste Minimisation Learning Hubs


Action

Description

Timeframe

Waste Minimisation
Learning Hubs

Continue to develop the three Waste Minimisation Learning Hubs in Henderson, Waiheke and Onehunga.
These hubs are open to community groups, adult education providers and schools. There is significant
potential to expand the scope of these hubs and also link them to community capacity building projects.

2012 ongoing

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 75

Schools
Schools are hubs in their communities and the education children receive influences their world views and behaviour
as adults. The following programmes have been developed over time by former councils in the Auckland region and
have high levels of success. All actions are funded by waste levy funds.

3.2.6 WasteWise Schools


Action

Description

Timeframe

WasteWise Schools

This programme helps schools reduce their waste and promotes waste reduction practices that students
can transfer into their home and everyday life. It provides an opportunity for student-driven solutions for
waste reduction and whole-school involvement in waste minimisation. The programme will be continued
with additional support for schools to implement organic waste reduction systems for educational
purposes. The council will also support the continued development of the waste component
of Enviroschools.

2012 ongoing

WasteWise Schools
communication

Promote WasteWise Schools programme and develop waste education, web-based and e-learning resources
such as podcasts and e-tutorials.

2012 ongoing

Business
Develop an integrated strategy to engage business in targeted waste streams in particular organics and C&D.
Foster local economic activity and new business opportunities in resource recovery and recycling. Build consumer
demand for extended producer responsibility and business leadership in waste reduction.

3.2.7 Business engagement and programmes


Action

Description

Timeframe

Change/ongoing
communications

Carry out a social marketing campaign for business to encourage waste wise behaviours and raise
visibility of key programmes and services. Complete overhaul of website, RENEW database and
development of business communications strategy.

2012 ongoing

'Waste rangers
for business

Develop a new programme that targets the waste behaviour of businesses in CBDs and other public
places and shopping strips. This programme will provide hands-on help to areas with high refuse
outputs and link with town centre and business association initiatives.

2012 ongoing

Conscious
Consumers

Continue to support this new, innovative programme that works with the hospitality industry to reduce
organic and packaging waste. Support expansion of the programme to other industries where appropriate
in the future.

2012 ongoing

Eco Smart business

The council is to participate in and continue to support this national programme targeted at business
in partnership with MfE and the Employers and Manufacturers Association. Recently rebranded, the
programme offers incentives and education to reduce waste in production, packaging, distribution
and service delivery.

2012 ongoing

Waste brokers
for business

Seed funding to develop a pilot Waste Broker Service, a new initiative to link waste producers with recyclers
and reusers, and create efficiencies in materials redistribution. There is potential for this programme to be
delivered directly by the council, local business or social enterprise located within the RRN. This programme
is to be developed using innovative methods and drawing on lessons from other regions.

2012 ongoing

Promote programmes
such as REBRI and
Green Star to
the building and
construction industry

As well as developing resource recovery facilities for receiving and processing C&D waste, and
enacting clean fill regulations, the council can help reduce C&D waste by promoting business
programmes that encourage on-site waste separation, and waste minimisation such as REBRI,
and the Green Star accreditation programme.

2012 ongoing

Investigate
establishing
demonstration
projects

The council will investigate the possibility of establishing demonstration projects to encourage the use of
recovered materials in construction, and to demonstrate waste reduction on construction sites.

2012 ongoing

Acknowledge
successful
businesses

The council will acknowledge businesses that successfully reduce construction and demolition waste.

2012 ongoing

PART D

Appendices

DRAFT WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 77

Appendix 1
Auckland Council
Waste Assessment
Attached (CD) or available on
the Auckland Council website at:
www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/wasteplan

Appendix 2
Monitoring and
Reporting FRamework
The council will monitor and report on progress towards
meeting the strategic objectives and targets of the waste
management and minimisation plan (WMMP). This information is
essential for evaluating how services are performing and
for establishing baseline data to assist future planning.

A framework for monitoring and reporting is outlined in this section. Key areas that require monitoring include
waste reduction, level of service, and compliance with legislative requirements and regulations.

Action

Relating
to targets

Relating to strategic objectives

Method of
assessment

Reporting

Collect and report


on quantity,
composition and
destination of domestic
kerbside waste

Short to medium-term
target (30% reduction
per capita in domestic
kerbside waste to
landfill by 2018).

Council records

Annual report

Annual Solid
Waste Analysis
Protocol (SWAP)
assessments

Council
publications

Council
website

Annual report

Council
publications

Council
website

Report on quantity of
commercial waste sent
to landfill

Collect and report on


quantity, composition
and destination of
council-collected
diverted materials

Long-term target
(Reduce council- and
private-sector-influenced
waste to landfill by
30% from the
baseline of 0.8 tonnes
per capita per year in
next 15 years).

Achieving operational efficiencies in


domestic waste and recycling services

Reducing harm from waste

Preventing organic waste going to landfill

Reducing the councils responsibility


for dealing with end-of-life consumer
products and packaging

Reducing Aucklands reliance on landfill

Short to medium-term

target (30% reduction per

capita in domestic kerbside
waste to landfill by 2018).

Report on quantity
of materials deposited
in cleanfills (subject to
provision of information)

Reducing Aucklands reliance on landfill


Long-term target (Reduce
council- and private-sector
influenced waste to landfill
by 30% from the baseline
of 0.8 tonnes per capita,
per year in next 15 years).

Reducing Aucklands reliance on landfill


Achieving operational efficiencies in
domestic waste and recycling services

Reducing Aucklands reliance on landfill

Preventing organic waste going to landfill


(and cleanfill)

In agreement with
landfill operator to
supply tonnage
data

Bylaw

Council records

Annual report

Annual Solid Waste


Analysis Protocol
(SWAP) audits

Council
publications

Council
website

In agreement with
cleanfill operators

Annual report

Council
publications

Council
website

Annual report

Council
publications

Council
website

Annual report

Council
publications

Council
website

Annual report

Council
publications

Council
website

Bylaw

Council records

Developing an infrastructure to maximise


resource recovery

30% reduction per capita


in council in-house waste
by 2018.

Reducing Aucklands reliance on landfill

Reducing harm from waste

Monitor and review


effectiveness of council
communication and
waste minimisation
programmes

Short to medium-term
target (30% reduction
per capita in domestic
kerbside waste to landfill
by 2018).

Monitor compliance
with legislative requirements and regulations
of all solid waste assets
and operations

Reducing harm from waste

Collect and report on


quantity, composition
and destination of
council in-house waste
to landfill

Long term target (Reduce


council and privatesector-influenced waste
to landfill by 30% from
the baseline of 0.8 tonnes
per capita, per year in
next 15 years).

Bylaw

Reducing the councils responsibility


for dealing with end-of-life consumer
products and packaging

Reducing litter and illegal dumping and


related costs

Preventing organic waste going to landfill

Short to medium-term

target (30% reduction per
capita in domestic kerbside

waste to landfill by 2018).

Collect and report on


littering incidences, and
on quantity of illegal
dumping

Reducing Aucklands reliance on landfill


Reducing harm from waste

Preventing organic waste going to landfill

Reducing Aucklands reliance on landfill

Reducing harm from waste

Preventing organic waste going to landfill

Reducing the councils responsibility


for dealing with end-of-life consumer
products and packaging

Maximising local economic


development opportunities

Legislative compliance achieved

Council waste
services reporting

Annual Solid Waste


Analysis Protocol
(SWAP) audits

Attitude and
behaviour baseline
survey, with annual
follow up surveys
Solid Waste
Analysis Protocol
(SWAP) audits

Council records

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 79

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

appendix 3:
COMMUNITY
GRANTS SCHEME
FRAMEWORK
Auckland Council will establish a grants scheme to
support community waste minimisation initiatives
(Section C, Section 3.1.10). Following is a brief proposed
framework outlining the purpose of the scheme and how
the grants may be delivered and monitored. Detailed
guidelines will be developed.

Purpose
The purpose of the grants scheme is in accordance with
Section 47 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008:

promote or achieve waste management and


minimisation

reduce waste to landfill, in accordance with the


objectives of this plan

foster new ideas and encourage community


participation in reducing waste to landfill.

Funding criteria
Successful grant applications must:

s upport the strategic objectives and targets


of this plan

lead to measurable waste reduction outcomes.

Funding priorities, aimed at addressing specific parts


of the waste stream (e.g. green waste) or certain issues
(e.g. illegal dumping) may be developed and reviewed
on an annual basis to focus a proportion of funds on
areas that require innovation and/or attention.
Grants may be used to support a wide range of
initiatives from education programmes to building
resource recovery infrastructure, with a focus on seed
funding for new initiatives.

Grant size
The size and number of grants will be determined
once funding priorities are set.

Monitoring and reporting requirements


Successful applicants will be required to submit reports
on the completion of their projects or according to an
agreed timeframe if the project is long term. Auckland
Council will report on the number, size, recipients and
outcomes of grants in its annual plan, on the councils
website and in council publications.

Recipients
The scheme will be open to community groups, local
businesses, marae, schools and other community-based
organisations operating within Auckland.

Grants may be used to support a wide


range of initiatives from education
programmes to building resource recovery
infrastructure, with a focus on seed
funding for new initiatives.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 81

appendix 4:
OPTIONS FOR
DOMESTIC KERBSIDE
ORGANIC WASTE
COLLECTIONS AND
DOMESTIC INORGANIC
WASTE SERVICES
1 Kerbside
organic waste
collection options

In Britain although both separate and combined


collections operate in recent years separate food
waste collections systems have become more popular,
as higher value, beneficial end-products are developed.
In addition, if green waste is needed in the mix, the
amount can be more easily controlled.
There are currently no food-waste-only collections
operating in New Zealand. However, a large-scale
trial of a food-waste-only collection is currently
being conducted in Putaruru where, for a one-year
period, 2200 households are testing a 23-litre, manually
collected, roadside container with a lock-down lid, a
7-litre kitchen caddy, and a supply of biodegradable bags.
Combined food waste and green waste collections are
provided by Timaru District Council87 (which provides
a 240-litre wheelie bin collected fortnightly), and by
Christchurch City Council88 (which provides an 80-litre
wheelie bin collected weekly).
Auckland Council has undertaken extensive research
into the options for organic waste collection and
processing, which can be found in Appendix C of
the Auckland Council Waste Assessment (included
as Appendix 1).
For Auckland the choices are summarised in
the next table bearing in mind the following
key drivers for the council:

There are a number of options to reduce the


50 per cent by weight of domestic refuse collections
that is organic matter going to landfill. Worldwide,
organic diversion systems are generally offered in
two basic ways:

reducing waste to landfill


(and aiming for Zero Waste)

cost

convenience and ease of use for residents

separate green waste and food waste collections

combined green and food waste.

beneficial end products and end uses


(and potential revenue)

health and safety (for contractors)

impact on the private green waste sector.

Each city that has an organic collection operates under


a different regulatory environment with different
incentives and public/private sector involvement so no
system is exactly the same. For example, Toronto has
separate food waste and green waste collections84; and
Vancouver85 and Adelaide86 are introducing food waste
into existing green waste collections.

84 www.toronto.ca/greenbin
85 www.vancouver.ca/projects/foodwaste/index.htm

87 www.timaru.govt.nz/rubbish-and-recycling

86 www.zerowaste.sa.gov.au/councils/food-waste-pilot

88 www.ccc.govt.nz/homeliving/rubbish/kerbsidecollection/index.aspx

Organic waste options


Option

Waste diversion
potential estimate
(tonnes per year)

A. Food waste only


60-litre wheelie bin with false
bottom, 23-litre capacity

Up to 48,000 tonnes of
food waste

Automated collection

7000 tonnes of green


waste, through user-pays
incentives

Weekly

Considerations

$13.7 million

1.

Automated collections reduce health


and safety risks.

2.

More food waste diversion than if mixed


with green waste.

3.

More processing options including composting,


and provides flexibility for higher value
products such as stock feed, liquid fertiliser.

4.

Requires source of green waste or tailings


for compost.

5.

Cheaper to operate than combined food


and green waste.

$14.2 million

B. Food waste combined with


a handful of green waste
60-litre wheelie bin with false
bottom, 30-litre capacity

Net cost
(estimate)
of organic
service only

44,000 tonnes
food waste

Automated collection
Weekly

8000 tonnes
green waste

$26.9 million

C. Separate food
waste and green
waste collections
240-litre wheelie bin for green
waste monthly

28,000 tonnes
green waste

60-litre wheelie bin with false


bottom, 23-litre capacity for
food waste weekly

48,000 tonnes
food waste

Automated collection for both

6.

No impact on green waste industry.

7.

Some residents who already have a private


green waste collection would have four bins.

8.

60-litre false bottom bin may be seen


as unusual.

1.

Automated collections reduce health


and safety risks.

2.

Evidence from overseas shows that there is


a trend for mixed food/green waste bins to
capture less food waste than food waste alone.

3.

Additional cost due to larger quantities


being collected.

4.

May or may not increase food waste


volumes diverted.

5.

Minimal impact on green waste industry.

6.

Will attract some green waste already


diverted to home composting or green
waste collection services.

7.

Convenience for residents who only


have a little green waste and do not
want to use it on their sections.

8.

Fewer residents would have four bins.

1.

Large impact on green waste industry as green


waste potentially moves into a council scheme.

2.

Would mean four bins and four (total)


collection systems for most residents.

3.

Likely to reduce costs for residents who


currently contract a private green waste
collection (estimated to be 15% of
households), but may increase costs for
those who do not.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 83

$12.7 million

D. Green waste only


240-litre wheelie bin

1.

Assumes that 100% of green waste currently


going into refuse will be diverted.

2.

Large impact on green waste industry as green


waste likely to move into a council scheme.

3.

Focused on waste stream that makes up only


10% waste to landfill.

4.

Likely to reduce costs for residents who


currently contract a private green waste
collection (estimated to be 15% of
households), but increase costs for those
who do not.

$0

1.

Does not reduce the 50% food waste and green


waste component of current refuse bags/bins
that currently goes to landfill.

$12.7 million

1.

As per Option A in table.

$13.2 million

1.

As per Option B in table.

$9.2 million

2.

As per Option A above.

$9.7 million

2.

As per Option B above.

28,000 tonnes green


waste

Automated collection
Monthly

E. No organic collections

A.a. Food waste only


60-litre wheelie bin with false
bottom, 23-litre capacity

Up to 43,400 tonnes of
food waste

Automated collection

6000 tonnes of green


waste, through user-pays
incentives

Weekly.
No rural areas or Hauraki Gulf
Islands (HGI) organic collection

B.a. Food waste combined


with handful of green waste
60-litre wheelie bin with false
bottom, 30-litre capacity

39,400 tonnes food


waste

Automated collection

7200 tonnes green


waste

Weekly
No rural areas or HGI organic
collection
A.b. Food waste only
60-litre wheelie bin with false
bottom, 40-litre capacity

Up to 43,400 tonnes of
food waste

Automated collection

6000 tonnes of green


waste, through user-pays
incentives

Fortnightly
No rural areas or HGI organic
collection

B.b. Food waste combined


with handful of green waste
60-litre wheelie bin

39,400 tonnes
food waste

Automated collection
Fortnightly
No rural areas or HGI organic
collection

7000 tonnes green


waste

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN

2 Inorganic waste
collection option
Currently Auckland has a mix of kerbside inorganic
collections operated annually or biennially, from the
kerbside, or from within residents properties and
in some areas there is no collection.
Around the world the way cities deal with inorganic
waste or bulky items varies widely. Annual kerbside
inorganic collections like those that feature in parts
of Auckland are not the norm internationally, or in
other large cities in New Zealand.
Some of the more advanced cities in terms of waste
minimisation operate resource recovery centres often
run by the community sector. Residents can drop off
unwanted items at these facilities for reuse or recycling.
Or else bulky goods collected in such a way that
discarded items stay undamaged and can be reused.

This plan envisages the development, over time, of a


network of local resource recovery centres that could
divert more reusable and recyclable items and provide
economic opportunities for the community sector, iwi/
Ma-ori organisations and business, as well as providing
environmental, social and cultural benefits.
Many Aucklanders have, however, become used to the
inorganic kerbside service and appear loath to change
even though in two of the former councils there is either
a booking system or no service provided at all.
The proposed options for inorganic collection in
Auckland are summarised in the table on the next page,
bearing in mind the following key drivers for the council:

reducing waste to landfill (and aiming for


Zero Waste)

cost

health and safety (for contractors and the public)

ease of use for residents.

This plan envisages the development, over time, of a


network of local resource recovery centres that
could divert more reusable and recyclable items
and provide economic opportunities.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 85

Inorganic waste options


Option

Waste diversion
potential

Net cost
(estimate)

Considerations

1. Annual kerbside
collection

Small amount

$10.1 million

1.

Not international best practice.

2.

Informal recycling is perceived to be a natural


exchange of goods.

3.

Commercial scrap metal dealers benefit but in


extracting metals often destroy the reuse or
recyclable potential of articles.

4.

Mess often obstructs footpaths and roads.

5.

Health and safety risks associated with


manual collections, handling sharp objects
and hazardous waste.

6.

Illegal dumping (fly tipping) of commercial waste.

7.

Very few waste collection companies would tender


for inorganic collections.

8.

No feed stock for resource recovery centres.

2. B
 iennial kerbside
collection

Small amount

$6.8 million

1.

As (1) above but less cost.

3. Annual collection
from within residents
properties via a
booking system

Potentially more

$4.6 million

1.

Fewer health and safety, security and mess issues.

2.

Links user to waste being picked up.

3.

Reusable and recyclable items more likely to retain


value and go to resource recovery centres.

4.

Concern about potential increase in illegal


dumping did not occur when the system was
introduced in Waitakere as education and
enforcement were increased.

5.

Cost based on Waitakere model with 20%


participation rate.

1.

Households can take reusable items and recyclable


materials to resource recovery centres where they can
be resold or processed.

2.

Local enterprises could operate collection services.

3.

Longer-term solution.

4.

Cost includes reduction in current inorganic cost plus


approximately $1million in cost of building facilities.
Ongoing costs will reduce over time.

5.

As (1) above but less cost.

4. No collection
Resource Recovery
Centres only

2.a. Biennial kerbside


collection except for
Waitakere, Rodney and
Franklin which have booking,
with Waitakere enhanced
recovery

Potentially most

Small amount

-$3.2 million

$6.5 million

Note:
Current inorganic services inherited from the
former councils (mix of annual and biennial kerbside
services, an annual collection from within residents'
properties, drop-off points and no service) currently
cost ratepayers $4.2 million annually.

Limitations:
The figures above are estimates only. Preparation of both
the Waste Assessment and draft Waste Management and
Minimisation Plan has relied on information from multiple
sources including SWAP analyses from former councils, the
Auckland Regional Council Waste Stocktake and Strategic

Assessment 2009, permits, contracts, consents and


annual reports. The accuracy of these sources is contingent on the best information available at the time and the
degree of disclosure from the waste industry.
Financial analysis and modelling has relied on the best
financial information available at the time of drafting
this plan.
The proposed way forward with a rigorous analytical
stepped process with continuous validation of
data and peer review will mitigate the potential for
discrepancies/errors in further waste management
and minimisation planning.

Table of Definitions
Auckland Council Waste Assessment

Provides the necessary background information on the waste and diverted materials streams
that will enable a council to determine a logical set of priorities and inform its activities, as
defined by section 51 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008. A waste assessment must be
completed prior to a WMMP being reviewed.

Cleanfill

Any landfill that accepts only material that, when buried, will have no adverse effect on people
or the environment.

C&D waste

Construction and demolition waste.

The council

In this plan, the council generally encompasses the collection of bodies that make up the
Auckland Council family: the governing body, local boards, CCOs and council advisory groups
and panels. For specific actions of the plan, however, the appropriate part of the council will
undertake that action.

Diverted material

Anything no longer required for its original purpose and, but for commercial or other
waste minimisation activities, would be disposed of or discarded.

Domestic waste

Waste from households.

ETS

Emissions Trading Scheme.

Landfill

A disposal facility as defined in section 7 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008,


excluding incineration.

LGA

Local Government Act.

Litter and illegal dumping

Littering is defined in the Litter Act 1979 as: litter includes any refuse, rubbish, animal
remains, glass, metal, garbage, debris, dirt, filth, rubble, ballast, stones, earth, or waste matter,
or any other thing of a like nature. A definition of dumping is that: dumping is not a separate
offence but is littering at the extreme end of the scale that depends on the amount and
nature of the litter that is deposited, the location and circumstances in which the littering
occurs and the resources required to remove the litter.

Mana whenua

Customary authority exercised by an iwi or hapu in an identified area.

Managed fill

A disposal site requiring resource consent to accept well-defined types of non-municipal


waste (e.g. low-level contaminated soils).

Mauri

The life force which all objects contain; a material symbol of a life principle.

MfE

The Ministry for the Environment.

MRF

Materials recovery facility.

MRB

Mobile recycling bin.

NZWS

New Zealand Waste Strategy.

Organic waste

In this plan organic waste refers to food waste (or kitchen waste) and green waste
(or garden waste).

Public places

Although the Litter Acts definition of public places includes public reserves and parks this
WMMP defines public places as spaces frequented by the public that are not privately
owned (e.g. shopping malls) and excludes the parks and reserves network.

RRC

Resource recovery centre.

RRP

Resource recovery park.

RTS

Refuse transfer station.

SWAP

Solid Waste Analysis Protocol (SWAP), an MfE-led baseline programme to provide solid
waste composition information.

Tangata whenua

Indigenous people, people of the land, in New Zealand, the Ma-ori people.

Waste

Anything disposed of, or discarded; and:


includes a type of waste defined by its composition or source (e.g. organic waste,
electronic waste, or construction and demolition waste); and

to avoid doubt, includes any component or element of diverted material, if the


component or element is disposed of or discarded.

Wha-nau

Family, including extended family.

WMA

Waste Minimisation Act 2008.

WMMP

A waste management and minimisation plan as defined in section 43 of the


Waste Minimisation Act 2008.

WASTE Management and Minimisation PLAN I 87

Auckland council WAste assessment CD

If your copy of the Auckland Council Waste Assessment is not here,


please visit www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/wasteplan or call 09 301 0101.

EUPL-0038 09/12 (plan) AC-1168


ISBN 978-1-927216-13-2 (print)
ISBN 978-1-927216-14-9 (Online)
If disposing of this document, please ensure you separate the wire coil from the pages prior to putting in the recycling bin.
Auckland Council disclaims any liability whatsoever in connection with any action taken in reliance of this document or for any error, deficiency, flaw or omission contained in it.