Each person in Israel produces an average of 1.6 kilograms of household waste per day. To try and improve the environmental situation in Israel, we all need to mobilize and reduce the amount of garbage we produce* using waste as a recycled raw material, for the purpose of energy production or reuse in its current form - these are the ways in which the situation can be improved
By: Gilad Ostrovsky, Galileo
It is worthwhile to recycle - but it is more worthwhile to produce less waste
In Israel, about four million tons of domestic and commercial waste are generated every year (without taking into account agricultural waste, industrial waste, 250,000 tons of hazardous waste and 7.5 million tons of construction waste and excess dirt). The waste is buried, for the most part, in the ground, and only a minority is recycled. The recently completed waste management master plan predicts that as early as 2014 there will be a shortage of landfill land in Israel.
According to the national garbage composition survey for 2004, each person in Israel produces an average of 1.6 kilograms of household waste per day, which is over half a ton per year. Is it a lot? Is it little? What does this data mean? Is it possible to draw the trends of the waste economy, understand the direction of their development and set clear policy goals? I believe that the key to understanding the issue of waste lies in recognizing that the best way to deal with waste is to deal with it before it becomes waste.
What are things supposed to be? The waste materials are emitted as unwanted by-products of human activity. Since the waste is created, we try to get rid of it in the cheapest and least disturbing way possible. But it turns out that all waste treatment methods (landfill, incineration and even recycling) require resources (mainly energy) and most of them even involve the emission of secondary waste and additional pollution. This means that waste treatment also contributes to the environmental burden and increases the environmental pressure on habitats and the human living environment.
Abatement at sourceLet's go back to the numbers, and try to learn something from them. The amount of waste in Israel is constantly increasing, both in its general amount and in the amount of waste per person. Therefore, the first and most important step is to reverse the trend, and reduce the amount of waste generated each year. This reduction means treating waste before it becomes waste, i.e. less packaging, less nylon, less cardboard, less plastic, less electronics and so on. This is a very important task, and the main action to achieve it should be directed towards the production phase. The role of local authorities in this matter is limited, but consumers have a significant role in creating change, rejecting unnecessary packaging and reducing excess consumption. The consumer who buys a cup of yogurt will give up with the packaging in his hand at the end of use. Creating light and economical packaging will, therefore, leave less waste. The manufacturer can also produce packaging adapted for reuse, and thereby also contribute to reducing the amount of waste.
In many respects, the reduction goal is difficult to achieve, since it is contrary to the nature of the society of abundance and the trend of overproduction and the flood of consumption, which are presented in a positive light and are perceived as necessary for continued growth. Since the existing link between economic growth and the increase in the amount of waste is extremely problematic, this goal must also be formulated in other words: severing the link between growth and the increase in the amount of waste. Healthy growth is growth without waste. In some European countries this goal is already being achieved.
The growth made Canberra, the capital of Australia (300,000 inhabitants), which set its goal to be a city without waste in 2010. The plan is to find an additional use for all waste materials, from treating the organic material in the yard (without allowing it to be thrown in the trash) to maximum utilization of recycled raw materials. Landfilling of waste should stop.
The large differences in the amount of waste per person in the various local authorities show the great importance of severing this connection. According to 2004 data, in Sabion each person produces 4.59 kg of waste per day, while in Berhat in the Negev - 0.32 kg per day on average.
Upstream treatmentThe central concept that guides the reduction goal at the source is treatment upstream, through the application of "extended manufacturer's responsibility". The main tool for realizing this concept is legislation that incentivizes the industry to act to reduce the source. The years of experience and hundreds of studies have proven in an unambiguous way that (voluntary) authority programs are not the way to a solution. The goal will be achieved, first and foremost, through legislation that imposes clear obligations and establishes new rules of the game for the market. I say this with regret, because the way of education and persuasion is a more humane and worthy way and we should not let go of it, but it must be built on a foundation of regulation and legislation.
Let's take for example the issue of electronic waste. Its amount is estimated at about 100,000 tons per year in Israel, and it is growing at a rate three times greater than that of household waste. Addressing the public in educational language will not be of much use here. When the printer stopped working a year after buying it and buying a new printer is cheaper than repairing the old one, then we will probably buy a new printer, and the one bought only a year ago will become waste. On the other hand, imposing an obligation on the manufacturers to collect and recycle their products will make them produce sustainable products, with a longer lifespan, and thus the amount of waste produced will decrease. This is also how the production patterns will change, all aimed at selling more and more, without considering the waste and pollution that is created. Here we must note with regret that the policy of the Ministry of Environmental Protection is not inclined in this direction, and most of its resources are directed to treating the rising waste downstream.
After exhausting all the steps to reduce the amount of waste at the source, we must act to expand the recovery, that is, using the waste in one of three ways: reusing the waste in its current form; using it as a recycled raw material in the production process (recycling); or using waste as a source of energy production. That is, we must strive for circular processes and to reduce the amounts of material that are no longer useful.
In the second circle, a prominent place is reserved for the local authorities, who are entrusted with the responsibility for handling waste and have a variety of tools at their disposal. And we will return to the example of the amounts of waste above. Apparently, the differences in the amount of waste between Savion and Rahat show that a population of high socio-economic status produces a lot of waste, and a population of low status produces little. However, additional data completely disrupts this picture: Mashgav Regional Council (0.82 kg per inhabitant per day); Kiryat Tivon (1.29); and Ra'anana (1.01). These examples, the ones from the Environmental Protection Ministry's report for 2004, teach two things. One is that a local authority can achieve real achievements in recycling waste and reducing the amounts sent to landfill by separating waste into separate bins for glass, paper, cardboard, organic waste, etc. The residents of Kiryat Tivon, for example, separate the organic material and put it in a separate bin. In the Mashgav Council, home composters were distributed to many residents and recycling centers were established.
The reliability of the data is questionableThe second thing that the authorities' report highlights is that, in fact, the reliability of the data is highly questionable. The Eilot Regional Council, for example, maintains an extensive activity in the field of recycling, but discovered to its astonishment that it stars at the top of the list of waste producers (6.03 kg per inhabitant per day). It turned out that agricultural waste and other waste were included in the report, and because of this a completely distorted picture was obtained.
To this it should be added that the local authorities have to report annually on the amount of their waste, but most of them do not fulfill this obligation. The lack of a reliable data base largely sterilizes the ability to operate to increase recovery. According to the recycling regulations, the authorities must recycle 25% of all household waste produced in them in 2007. In the absence of a reporting norm and without the threat of real sanctions, there is no way to know what the true recovery rate is, no ability to draw conclusions, and it is impossible to use effective tools for economic incentives.
The Ministry of Environmental Protection maintains that the recycling rate of household waste is 22%, but the calculation of the data from the Ministry's report for 2004 indicates only 12%. Familiarity with what is done in the field, in the recycling plants, leads us to estimate that the real recycling rate is even lower.
EpilogueIt is important to emphasize that the treatment of waste does not have to be based on sophisticated technological means, but rather on community activity, on local facilities and on realizing the advantage for smallness (as opposed to an advantage for size). A local authority that strives to treat waste in its own yard, while realizing its unique advantages, will be able to achieve considerable achievements, much more than an authority that sets up huge projects that are difficult to supervise and are alienated from the environment and most of its residents.
Gilad Ostrovsky is a waste and recycling scientist in the scientific department at Adam Teva and Din. Specializes in waste management policy and resource conservation. Has a master's degree in environmental policy and planning, the Hebrew University.
