Page 536 - Week 04 - Thursday, 29 June 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
established. Perhaps for the record I will make a couple of comments in relation to big bins. My colleague Mr Humphries has already indicated that there are disadvantages. Indeed, there are disadvantages and advantages which no doubt will be taken into account by the standing committee.
Mr Speaker, big bins had their origins in the 1950s in Europe and were introduced first in Australia in 1976 by the Kuring-Gai Council in Sydney. Throughout Australia in 1987, 117 of the 836 local government authorities were known to have adopted the big bin system and about 35 per cent of dwellings throughout Australia are at this stage using the bins.
As for bin sizes, all but two councils have adopted the 240 litre size of big bin as that seemed to be the best appropriate size required by ratepayers to allow disposable garbage, garden wastes and other household rubbish. Most districts found an initial increase in garbage quantity due to getting rid of excess garbage, but that decreased when the novelty wore off, and the quantity fell back between the displaced 55 litre system and the initial surge of the new system.
The main reason for the introduction appeared to be the inability of the 55 litre garbage bin service to cope with increased generation of household wastes - and we have indeed heard that that is now about 2 kilos per household - and also the desire of local government authorities to rationalise waste management practices and keep pace with waste collection technology.
A number of disadvantages were encountered. Recycling activities can be affected as the big capacity sees all rubbish in the one bin, and one weekly collection in hot, humid conditions can result in increased putrefaction of waste, which leads to bad odours and also to an increase in flies.
Councils which have opted for large bins see the disadvantages as having no detrimental impact if appropriate countermeasures are taken. There were some advantages noted, such as increased control over a greater proportion of the community's waste, reduction of environmentally unsound waste disposal methods, and more efficient operation of disposal facilities. So I think there are a large number of things that can be examined in relation to the question of big bins, which no doubt this committee will do.
I am pleased to see that one of the other items to be examined relates to the "options for efficient collection of domestic waste" and that includes the means of collecting our garbage. Big bins are one point there perhaps, but how it is actually collected is another.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .