05 - Holistic Resource Systems: A simple solution to a complex problem

To accelerate the transition towards a circular economy, we need innovation and new business models, of course. But more than that, we need to maximize the use of the effective systems that already exist. In our latest episode, we talk to Dr. Debbie Fletcher, Director of Operations at Eunomia, about how we can leverage existing solutions to achieve our sustainability targets. 

Listen to the episode below, or use your favourite platform (Apple Podcast, Spotify, Google Podcasts)

Show Notes

•    What are Holistic Resource Systems? [01:44]

•    The origin of CO2 emissions [03:08]

•    How policymakers can improve resource management [06:07]

•    Why collection systems should be based on materials [8:59]

•    How to salvage more secondary raw materials [11:39]

•    Biggest challenges in establishing EPR systems [16:08]

•    Is it too late to fight global warming? [20:22]

•    Key indicators for transformation [21:46]

•    Most robust levers to achieve net zero [24:10]

•    Final thoughts [26:02]

Transcript

Mithu: Welcome to TOMRA Talks Circular, where we explore how businesses, municipalities, and governments are collaborating towards a circular economy. Right now, it's more evident than ever what resource dependence means. 

Our environment is rapidly deteriorating, and communities worldwide have discussed the urgent need to stop wasting precious raw materials and instead save them in a circular system. But the progress is still halting, despite the apparent urgency. The introduction of a circular raw materials economy is necessary, but still a complex issue. That said, not every complex problem requires a more complex solution. 

For those of you who have been following the program, you might still remember that our very first episode focused on the Holistic Resource System, and we thought this might be a good time to revisit that concept from a different angle. 

My name is Mithu Mohren, and my guest today is Dr. Debbie Fletcher, Director of Operations at Eunomia, one of Europe's leading think tanks on the subject. The extensive experience of Dr. Fletcher most prominently entails producer responsibility measures and the improvement of local authority waste management. Debbie, a warm welcome to the program.

Debbie: Thanks, Mithu. It's lovely to be here.

Mithu: So, let's start by putting a spotlight on the current situation. Recently, Eunomia published its findings in a report that details the Holistic Resource System. Coupled with the white paper issued by TOMRA last year, these documents serve as cornerstones for decision makers in governments, responsibility from municipalities to regional administrations. The evidence-based approach to increasing recycling rates is core for Holistic Resource Systems to lower CO2 emissions. So, Debbie, for a start, what exactly does holistic mean?

Debbie: By Holistic Resource Systems, we mean the needs to bring together a fully integrated package of waste management techniques into a single system so we can respond to the challenges of managing waste and reducing emissions using both national and local waste management approaches. 

In essence, it means looking at the optimal solution for each material from how the waste is collected through to how it's subsequently recycled, treated, or disposed of. It's designed as a system for the here and now using technology that's already available.

Mithu: So, as we said before, it doesn't have to be complex, I guess.

Debbie: Absolutely not.

Mithu: So, going back to the question of CO2, what's the origin of the CO2 pollution? What sources can we identify as there?

Debbie: So, if we look at this globally … and it is a global challenge, we're currently emitting the equivalent of around 50 billion (metric) tons of CO2 per year. Just over half of those are coming from heat, power, and transport. There's a further 20% that's coming from the production of food, and that leaves around 25 to 30% of the emissions derived from the materials we consume. And that includes the waste that's subsequently generated.

Mithu: So, we have an opportunity by, let's say, implementing the right system in waste management to really make a dent, an impact in CO2.

Debbie: Yeah, a considerable dent.

Mithu: So how can we actually introduce savings?

Debbie: As shown in our series of work on Waste in the Net Zero Century, implementing good waste management practice across the globe for municipal waste could reduce emissions by around 2.8 billion tons of CO2 per year. So that could tackle 5% of the world's emissions. 

And what do we mean by “good” waste management practice? Well, 77% of that reduction comes from maximizing the collection and sorting of materials to enable it to go back into new products. So, this includes introducing recycling collection where there is no current practice for waste collection. It also includes improving existing separate collection and sorting of municipal waste, where there is some current collection … and maximizing those additional material captures. Between those, we're talking about 51% of the total reduction of emissions. 

Finally, it also includes undertaking mixed waste sorting of all the residual waste that's left before incineration or landfilling it … and that's capturing additional material for recycling as well. And that's contributing 26% to that total reduction. There's also a further 23% reduction from ensuring the remaining waste that's currently in open dumps or is open burning … where there's no formal system is actually then … once the recyclate is taken out, the remainder is put into a formal waste management system and therefore has its emissions controlled accordingly.

Mithu: And of course, that also has a humanities effect as well, correct?

Debbie: Absolutely. Important for human health and quality of life as well.

Mithu: So, let's go back to the to the actual waste management for a moment. You mentioned it's separate collection. It's mixed waste sorting. It's global residual waste treatment. Where and how should we start?

Debbie: We need to start by putting in place the policies to support producers doing the right thing, really, in the way that they design their products through to the way that moves through the system and into the waste management system. And part of that is about ensuring that producers pay for the true costs of end-of-life management of material that they're placing on the market. And that's what we call extended producer responsibility. 
Those policies will encourage the right design of products so they can become easier to sort and to recycle. And it's also providing the funding into the resource system so that they can do so. Producers of materials and products need to work much more closely with the waste management system, with those that are providing that service to make sure that the design goes right the way through from end to end. 

We also need policies that maximize the carbon benefit from recycling wherever possible, and through that we're enabling the materials to be recycled back into products as many times as we can before they're lost through the system. If policies recognize the carbon benefit rather than simply focusing on tonnage, that's going to change the product design because it's going to lead to focus on increased recycled content and circularity of resource. 

Those are the sort of underpinning measures really that you need to create the level playing field and to make sure the right financing is in the system such that you can generate a Holistic Resource System.

Mithu: So, is the financing … is that the reason that while EPR or extended producer responsibility is that the reason that this is really central or key to having an efficient system or efficient collection in place?

Debbie: Financing is definitely one key element and key driver from an EPR policy design. It's about getting the right money in the right places and making sure the responsibility is shared appropriately across the system. But it's also about the design that comes in underneath that in terms of making something recyclable and making sure that the system is set up to recycle as much as possible in a circular way. So, it has sort of two components to it. But yes, financing is a very important component.

Mithu: And are specific collection systems better for certain types of material?

Debbie: Absolutely. I would say you need to be very material specific in how you look at the overall Holistic Resource System. So, as we've focused and modeled that system, we've looked at, for instance, food waste. Food waste in order to be properly recyclable in a human health way, it needs to be separately collected. In order for you to apply the digestate that comes at the end to the land, for instance, or the compost onto the land – it needs to be separately collected. It's also as a double benefit that you're taking it out … you're taking out contamination which enables things like mixed waste sorting to happen more effectively as well later down and cleaner recyclate coming out the back end of the system.
If, however, we take plastics and metals as an example, the decision on how to best collect the material is more complex in some ways. Collection of PET and metal beverage bottles through a deposit system: This is an intrinsic part of the Holistic Resource System because it generates really high capture rates and high-quality material.

Mithu: When we say really high, what are we looking at?

Debbie: 90% plus capture rates of material. [Mithu: Okay, that is very high.] Yeah, and it enables recycling back into food grade material, which can then be used again for beverage packaging. However, other than that, assuming that's in place and depending on demand for food grade plastics, the separate collection of recycled plastics and metals in a household way … so through the curbside, for instance, might not be necessary. 

Because you then have very high sorting efficiencies in new mixed waste sorting plants which can extract that material and it can still be recycled into high grade applications. So, it's a different set up depending on the material that you're looking at.

Mithu: So, did I understand correctly: Plastics and metals don't need to be collected separately?

Debbie: Not necessarily. It depends. Deposit return systems are a form of separate collection, but at the curbside by the householder, they may not need to separately collect those.

Mithu: So then if we move on to the next form of, let's say, recovery or collection, if you will. Consumption continues to grow as the world population does. I think we all know that the projections reveal that the volume of waste will also continue to grow as a result. 

Unfortunately, many resources still remain in waste … and, as we've learned in previous episodes … are lost to incineration and or landfill, depending on where you are in the world. So how can we salvage that material? And I know you've touched on this a little bit before, but perhaps you can expand on that.

Debbie: Absolutely. This is where mixed waste sorting technology really comes into play. It's a really great complementary technology to the separate collections upstream. And what it's doing is it's extracting a significant amount of extra material out of that residual waste before it goes on to incineration or to landfill. 

As you said earlier on, that's contributing about 26% reduction in the carbon emissions out of the total that we see can be delivered from this system. So, it's significant. And that's particularly because it's really good at picking out additional high-intensity carbon materials – so additional metals, additional plastics, and so on … and getting them back into the circular economy.

Mithu: And have you seen existing best practices in place of this?

Debbie: An example would be the Stavanger region in Norway, which we've looked at. This region already has all the components of the Holistic Resource System operating in some way. So, it has a deposit return system for PET and metal (beverage containers). It has separate collection for paper, cards, metals, glass, food, and garden waste – so, quite a comprehensive scheme. And then any remaining waste is going through a mixed waste sorting plant where the remaining plastics, metals, and papers are being extracted for recycling. 

When you look at that system overall, the recycling rate for the region is actually just under 50%. So, you would say, hmm, not that high. But when you look at it from a greenhouse gas perspective, the system's performing much better. It's currently realizing 67% of the total carbon benefit that could be realized if all recyclable material being deposited as waste was to be recycled. So, it's recognizing 67% of that already in a carbon sense. 

In essence, the system is focused less on capturing tonnage and more on capturing those carbon-intense materials. And that's driven significantly through the high performing deposit return system, as well as the mixed waste sorting plant that's there. And actually, we also looked at how much further we think that system could go. 

If we look at improving the Stavanger system further, most of the wriggle room there is in the separate collection element, which gives us a big hike in recycling rates and a little bit of an extra carbon benefit. But putting all components into place as effectively as we can and using today's technology, we can then get to a greenhouse gas recycling rate of 75% … so we can boost that up. So, it's recognizing 75% of the carbon benefit that might be realized if you got to 100% of recycling.

Mithu: Would it be fair to say, Debbie, it's not necessarily the quantity specifically, but really the quality of material that's being captured and the impact that it's having?

Debbie: Absolutely. And the fact it's capturing the high-quality material, and it is enabling it to go back into a more circular economy. So, the things that the material is being used for has a similar application to the original application it had. So, you're able to get it back into the circular economy and that's what gives you that carbon benefit.

Mithu: Okay. And as many of the experts on these on these programs or on this program, you make it sound very easy. However, I'm sure that there are challenges that you've encountered along the way. Perhaps you can tell us or share with us what those might be and how you would suggest handling those.

Debbie: Absolutely. Yeah, it's never as easy as it sounds on paper. A lot of my career has been focused on implementation of resource management systems at quite a local level. So, designing optimal systems, procuring them, implementing on the ground. I think from my experience, there's a few key elements. 

Firstly, human behavior is always a big challenge. So particularly in the middle part of that Holistic Resource System, we're asking residents to separately recycle different material streams. And of course, that is a human behavior of can you get them to do it, and how effectively will they do it? And to really tackle that, you need strong communications programs that are repeated on a very frequent basis to make sure that the messages get home. And you can have a really strong effect on improving separate collection within the Holistic Resource System through making sure the communications are right. So that would be the first one, I think. 

The second one, you know, it all comes to money to some degree. So, we've got combinations – here of a local system, a separate collection at the curbside level. We've got a regional system … typically for a mixed waste sorting plan. And then you've got a national system over the top, which is a deposit return system. There's all different levels of a system and different operators within that system. So, it's about making sure that the financial flows between them are fair according to who's handling what material, in what way. 

As material is moved between systems -- so, if you decide to change one system and it takes material from one system to another, it obviously has financial consequences. So, it's important to think all those through and make sure that the system … the flows within the system … are fair and driving the right behaviors that you're looking for. 

Mithu: So, I would think transparency is also key in this.

Debbie: Absolutely key … absolutely key. And of course, you've got some materials where we don't have strong markets for those materials at the moment. Basically, some of them are costing to recycle. And if one particular element of the chain ends up with all that cost, but it isn't covered effectively through the financial flows, then of course it can't operate. So, it's really about making sure it's all operating overall with the right transparent information running through the system. 

I'd also say time is probably a challenge. Obviously, everything we're talking about here needs to happen as fast as possible, given what we're up against. But all waste equipment has a shelf life, so we need to get those into alignment, and they don't always coincide. So, we could have old plant that is a problem if it's still got a five- or ten-year contract to go, but it doesn't fit with the new system design. So, it's about finding ways to bridge the gaps, to put in additional bits of technology where you can or how do you how do you get from A to B in the most efficient and effective manner to drive the change in carbon benefit that you're looking for? 

And then I think the last one for me is always about measuring it and how that measurement drives the right behaviors. So, you know, is it recycling rate? Is it greenhouse gas recycling rate? Which is more important? Setting measures and governments setting those measures to drive the right behaviors is really important as part of that system and has caused problems in the past where the outputs of that haven't been thought through appropriately.

Mithu: That you just mentioned time. And actually, we started this episode talking about the urgency of getting this done in a proper and efficient way. And in fact, the IPCC or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recently has warned that it's not 5 (minutes) to 12, but actually we're late. It's 10 minutes too late, if we will. So, do you think it's actually too late to fight global warming?

Debbie: I don't think it's too late. If it was too late, I think I would have packed in my job [Mithu: laughs] and gone already, if I'm honest. I think it's never too late and we need to do what we can. And as we've been discussing the system, we're talking about the Holistic Resource System. It's here and now. The solutions are already there, and we have similar solutions in other sectors. You know, in the energy sector, they're already solutions, they exist. We just need to get them moving as fast as we can to buy time for the emerging technologies, for those more difficult to tackle areas. 

We also need to really get the general public ethos move towards ‘we've got to reduce our consumption’. So that's a big shift that we need to happen. But we've got all these other solutions that are stacked up that are ready to go. We just need to crack on and get on with them.

Mithu: That sounds pretty urgent to me. So, what are the key indicators for the transformation that we need to face … that we need to get done?

Debbie: Emissions reduction is obviously a key one. And how we measure that in a material sense, I'll come to in a minute, but I think we also need to put it into the perspective of a slightly wider set of measures. So, things such as biodiversity and human health, because that's going to give us the overall picture of the best mechanism for transformation. Because what we don't want to do is do something in a pure carbon sense that has a negative knock-on effect on biodiversity, which we know is also in deep distress at the moment. 

What we do know is we need to get rapidly to a point where we're reducing the amount of primary production of materials. And that's going to be through reducing consumption and through re-use and then recycling almost all of the remaining material around the system as many times as possible. So, yes, I've made it sound simple, but that is what we have to get to. 

And so easy ways perhaps of measuring progress around the transformation. Simple things like how much material is still sent for incineration in landfill, as we've got to see that drop dramatically in quite short time scale. I think also, though, it's about thinking about what we're doing when we recycle the material. So, what we don't want to get to is a case where we're avoiding the downstream by just doing a kind of downgraded recyclate. So, it's going into a material that perhaps it didn't really need to even go into, but it's classed as recycling. What we need is that maximum carbon benefit we've been talking about. So, we need to make sure it's going back into a similar use to what was previously used or as close as possible. On the front end of the of this sort of cycle, we'd also expect to see a significant reduction in the use of primary material that's going into goods. So recycled content going up, primary material coming down. So, they're kind of sort of some key reasonably easy indicators to be watching for. 

Mithu: And what, in your opinion, what is the most robust lever to get to a net zero century?

Debbie: Oh, I definitely don't think one's enough. I mean, for me, I'm I'll be pulling on every lever going, quite frankly. But I think I'd kind of summarize it as say there's a big lever in terms of the power of consumers. So, their product choices and focusing on reducing waste.

There's government levers and I think they're really important to get moving fast because as we discussed earlier, they underpin the ability to make systemic change really in this area. So, the EPR policy, we were talking about … greenhouse gas emissions metrics. I think that will then put in place or support the right investment levers to ensure the money is flowing up the hierarchy. So, we need the money to flow into the business models that are working to prevent waste, to enable re-use of waste, and to recycle waste … rather than as much of the large capital funding focusing too much on the bottom tier of the hierarchy. 

Then, of course, tied into all of that, the corporate levers which are tied into the consumer pressures. But I think which are increasingly driven from their own identification of their own risk around climate change. So, they're seeing it on their own risk and their own balance sheets, and they're thinking we need to do something about this to protect our own corporations.

Mithu: So, we're all in this together. There is no one and there's not even two robust levers. We all … as you said … we need to be pulling out all of them and maneuvering all of them at the same time, obviously as quickly as possible. 

And the last question here, you said that collection needs to be improved, recycling needs to be improved. We can definitely do better than we're doing … and we need to do it quickly. Still, we hear again and again that this problem cannot only be solved with recycling. And you've mentioned a couple of other options as well. In addition, let's just say this way. What's your personal appeal? What's your personal hope?

Debbie: My personal hope is that … I think, as I just described in the last answer actually … that we can as human beings, reduce our consumption. So, we all do need to reduce what we're consuming and that we can get to a way of living where re-use and recycling is the other model that we do. 

Once we've tackled as much reduction in consumption as possible, and so there's very little waste … very little of anything else going out of the system. So that we're managing everything effectively and we're really trying to control our resources as much as we can. And I think that has the knock-on positives of less extraction of raw materials, so less destruction of landscape … through that human health advantages, people having access to clean sanitation through effective waste treatment and it not getting to the point it has where we have made our planet a bit of a dumping ground. 

So that's my personal appeal would be we crack on with what we've got now, say the technologies are there, let's get moving as fast as we can, and we give space for those that are still coming through in terms of re-use, in terms of business models that are around reduced consumption, and we give them time to catch up. But we all do need to get a move on.

Mithu: Debbie, as always, a very informative and understandable conversation. It's been an absolute pleasure. Thank you very much.

Debbie: Thank you for having me, Mithu.

 If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave us a rating, subscribe, and turn on notifications. To comment on this episode, visit circular-economy.tomra.com/podcast