{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015764222069910898, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.576576576576577, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Factors Determining the Post-consumer Waste Recycling Burden

The environmental burden of collecting recoverables from households is generally omitted from life-cycle analyses comparing the environmental outcome of using secondary material from post-consumer waste (PCW) with virgin feedstock. However, this burden can be considerable, depending upon the characteristics of the collection methods employed. Given that the basic objective of recycling is to secure environmental benefits, it is vital that the burden of collection through both bring/dropoff and kerbside schemes is taken into account if a valid assessment of the environmental balance resulting from PCW recycling is to be made. This paper presents survey data comparing the burden of collection for different types of recycling provision. It describes the site and spatial characteristics determining the amount of transport dedicated to collection at bring/drop-off sites. Predictor variables are identified as measures of these characteristics, and the survey data compared with them. A regression model to assess energy use at bring/drop-off sites with varying characteristics is then developed. The potential uses of the techniques presented include the evaluation of the environmental burdens of recycling provision at the waste collection authority and regional level, allowing more informed choices to be made in the development of recycling provision from an environmental standpoint.