Comparative study for the inception of curb-side collection: A bachelor thesis commissioned by Vakin AB.   Linda Fahlander   Abstract   The purpose of this study was to investigate other municipalities' methods of inception of the curb-side collection with a four-compartment system. The Swedish government has sent a referral to see more of the curb-side collection of packaging and newspapers. The curb-side collection with a four-compartment system has proven to be the system with the greatest environmental benefits. This was a comparative study between 36 municipalities. The municipalities answered questions by the way of email regarding their attendance of the four-compartment system, financial instruments, communication to / from customers, the customers’ ability to recycle material in each municipality and problems that arose during the inception. The result from the comparative study showed that 33% of the variation was due to the quantity of recycling stations. Most municipalities had customers who had a generally positive attitude towards the curb-side collection. What the customers were most disturbed by was that the vessels are too big and that there is no room for them on their property. We are affected by the society around us and especially by our own municipality as well as the people we trust when it comes to our choices about waste management. The conclusion was that the basis for a higher attendance of the four-compartment system for VAKIN consist of several factors. According to this study, the waste tax and the quantity of recycling stations are decisive factors.   Key words: Four-compartment system, Curb-side collection, Municipal recycling, Waste tax

För att kunna uppnå de tuffare materialåtervinningsmålen som börjar gälla i Sverige år 2020 måste utsorteringen av bland annat plast-, papper- och metallförpackningar öka. Hushållsavfall beskrivs som en av de mest miljöpåverkande kategorin av avfall men samtidigt den kategori där det finns mest potential för förbättringar genom bättre hantering. Plockanalyser från 67 procent av Sveriges kommuner mellan åren 2013 och 2016 visar att ett svenskt villahushålls restavfall innehåller 34,5 procent förpackningar och returpapper som skulle kunna sorteras ut för materialåtervinning. Ett sätt att öka utsorteringen av producentansvarsmaterial från restavfallet och då kunna uppnå materialåtervinningsmålen är att kommuner erbjuder enklare samt ökad service i form av källsortering närmare hushållen. Tidigare studier har jämfört systemen optisk sortering och fyrfackskärl, som båda innebär källsortering närmare hushållen, med det vanligaste systemet i Sverige idag, tvåkärl, som inte innebär en ökad service genom kvalitativa metoder. Systemen har inte jämförts med kvantitativa metoder utifrån ekonomi eller miljö och inte heller med ett nytt koncept som heter Kvartersnära insamling. Den här rapporten har därför jämfört de fyra systemen utifrån aspekterna miljö och ekonomi med hjälp av verktygen livscykel- och livscykelkostnadsanalys som applicerades i ett område i Kristinehamns kommun för att på så sätt komma närmare verkligheten. Resultatet visar att systemet kvartersnära insamling har lägst miljöpåverkan i de undersökta miljöpåverkanskategorierna och därefter fyrfackskärl, optisk sortering och högst miljöpåverkan har systemet tvåkärl utifrån förutsättningarna och antagandena som har applicerats i studien. Livscykelanalysen visar att miljönyttan med materialåtervinningen överväger konsekvenserna av ökade transporter. Systemet med lägst livscykelkostnad är tvåkärl och sedan kvartersnära insamling, optisk sortering och dyrast livscykelkostnad har fyrfackskärl utifrån antaganden och de förutsättningar som använts i studien. En slutsats från rapporten är att det är viktigt att även undersöka andra aspekter förutom ekonomi och miljö vid val av insamlingssystem då resultatet till stor del beror på andra aspekter bland annat användarens uppfattning om systemet. / To achieve the stricter material recycling goals in Sweden in 2020 plastic-, metallic- and paper packages need to be better sorted from the household waste. Household waste might have the highest environmental impact compared with other sorts of waste but household waste has the highest potential to lower its impact. Waste pick-up analysis from 67 percent of Sweden's municipalities between 2013 and 2016 show that a Swedish household waste contains 34.5 percent packaging and recycled paper that could be sorted for recycling. The producers of that material have the responsibility to collect it but it does not work as well as planned because of different circumstances. One way to increase the recycling of the material from the household waste and then achieve the material recycling goals is that municipalities offer simpler and increased service in the form of source sorting closer to the households. Previous studies have compared the systems of optical sorting and multi compartment bin, which offer separation at sources closer to the households. Moreover, those systems have been compared with the most common system in Sweden today, two bins, which do not involve increased service. The systems have not been compared with quantitative methods based on economics or the environment, nor with a new concept called district collection. This report has compared the four systems. The aspects that have been compared are the environmental aspects and economical aspects by using the tools lifecycle assessment and lifecycle cost assessment. Moreover, the systems have been fictive studied in an area in the municipality of Kristinehamn, in order to get closer to reality. The results indicate that the collection system district collection had the lowest environmental impact followed by multi compartment bin and then optical sorting. Moreover, the system with two bins has the highest impact in the studied environmental impact categories according to the assumptions that have been applied in the study. The lifecycle assessment indicates that the benefits with material recycling is higher than the environmental impacts of increased transportation. The system with lowest lifecycle cost is the system with two bins and then the district collection. The system with highest lifecycle cost is the system optical sorting and the system with the second highest cost is multi compartment bin according to the assumptions that have been applied in the study. One conclusion from the study is that it is important to investigate more aspects than environmental impact and costs when to decide collection system. It is because the results depends on the other aspects as well like the users experience about the system.