Household Recycling Code of Practice: Consultation document

2. Dry recyclable waste collections

2.1 What the Code proposes

Local authorities should take steps to collect fibres (paper and cardboard) separately from containers (plastic including plastic film, metals and cartons). This is known as a “twin-stream” approach.

Local authorities have flexibility to collect glass in a way that suits local circumstances, but if a council chooses to collect glass from bring banks rather than at the kerbside, it should be able to demonstrate that this achieves the same quality and quantity of glass as kerbside collection.

Glass can be collected through:

• separate kerbside collections
• collections in the same container as plastics, plastic films, metals and cartons, or
• bring banks, if councils can demonstrate that this achieves the same quality and quantity of glass as kerbside collection

Local authorities retain flexibility over collection frequency. This reflects feedback from stakeholders that consistency in the collected materials is more important than uniformity in service design. The Code sets out recommended minimum per household capacities as follows:

• Fibres (paper and card): 40 litres per week
• Containers (plastics, plastic films, metals and cartons): 60 litres per week
• Glass: 20 litres per week (or 10 litres per week if provided through bring banks)

2.2 Impact of the proposed change

A twin-stream service maximises values of collected materials, increasing the economic opportunities for local authorities and reducing carbon emissions.

The Cost-Benefit Analysis Report^[12] did not show a clear correlation between the recycling collection method operated in Scotland, whether co-mingled or twin-stream, and recycling rate. This finding is supported by a study by the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) in 2015.^[13] Although now dated, this remains the largest published study of its kind on this topic. As a result, twin-stream is not modelled to increase the recycling rate.

However, the Cost-Benefit Analysis Report highlights that separating materials (for example wet containers from paper) reduces contamination, leading to a modelled annual carbon saving of 13,000 tCO2e per annum. This is based on reduced contamination and increased quality of collected materials leading to more recycling being reprocessed in closed-loop markets instead of made into lower grade alternatives that reduce the value of materials and the number of times it can be recycled. Separating fibres (paper and card) from glass is associated with the greatest reduction in contamination so the Code expects any co-mingling of glass to be with the container stream and not with fibres.

There is an upfront cost to providing more bins, modelled to be around £22 million. Operational costs, based on better quality of recycling leading to reduced treatment costs for recyclable materials and reduced costs of residual waste disposal, are a modelled annual saving of £5.2 million for Scottish local authorities.^[14] However, the extent to which this operational saving accrues to local authorities would be effected by pEPR.

Although the modelling suggests the recycling rate impact is flat, the most recently published evaluation of Recycling Improvement Fund Projects funded by the Scottish Government provides evidence that kerbside dry recycling service changes have increased recycling. Tonnages increased by 5.5% across 6 local authorities. However, the effect from twin-streaming alone can only be observed in one, Perth and Kinross Council, which increased its recycling tonnage by 7.2% in the year following implementation. The other 5 projects included in the statistical evaluation included other optimisation of services or a reduction in residual waste as well, which makes it challenging to attribute the benefits of twin-streaming directly. However, local authorities which implemented twin-streaming paired with residual waste reductions observed increases in recycling rate (4.6% and 6.1% for Aberdeenshire Council and Clackmannanshire Council, respectively).^[15]

Flexible plastics

The requirement to collect flexible plastics and plastic film was not discussed in detail during the co-design as it is a pre-existing four-nations commitment, but there were discussions about the method of collection. There was no consensus on whether the collection of flexible plastics should be mixed with other plastics or contained within a designated bag for flexible plastics. Material Recovery Facilities operate differently and there was no sufficiently persuasive reason identified to specify a particular collection method for inclusion in the Code. For that reason, the Code recommends that flexible plastics can be collected with other plastics and local authorities may determine additional arrangements for household collections depending on their local processing arrangements.

2.3 The extent of change required by local authorities to align with the Code

Twin-stream

Table 3 sets out the 23 local authorities that are mainly already collecting fibres separately from containers. Note that collections may not be universal across a whole authority so some services may need to change in these local authorities.

*Orkney Islands Council is included in the table, but does not currently collect cardboard at the kerbside (it instead provides collections at household waste recycling centres).

Only local authorities providing a twin-stream service to a majority of households are included in Table 3. Several local authorities have recently moved to separate collections of fibres and containers for some or all of the authority area. Eleven local authorities have done so with support from the Recycling Improvement Fund. Aberdeenshire, Angus, City of Edinburgh, Clackmannanshire, Comhairle nan Eilean Siar, East Lothian, Glasgow City, Highland, Midlothian, Perth & Kinross and West Lothian Councils have all delivered projects to increase separation of materials for recycling to some or all properties in the authority. Across Scotland as a whole, 81% of households had twin-stream collections (or additional levels of separation) in 2024, an increase from 62% in 2021.^[16]

Glass

Local authorities are already required to provide glass collections. Local authorities can collect glass by kerbside collections or at recycling points, known as bring banks, if councils can demonstrate that this achieves the same quality and quantity of glass as kerbside collection.

2.4 How co-design arrived at this proposal

Overall, stakeholders agreed that twin-stream should be the consistent service model. Recycling rate was identified as only one factor in considering the needs of Scotland’s recycling and waste services. Stakeholders highlighted how twin-stream helps maximise the value of recyclable materials, reduce emissions, provide more consistent and high-quality services, and improve communication with householders.

Support was not universal, due to the cost of additional containers and the scale of change required in some local authorities. However, it was noted that pEPR provides funds to local authorities to cover the cost of efficient and effective collections.