Participants generally advised keep it simple ensure visualisations work in black-and-white include Sankey diagrams and infographics comments unhappiness with the colour scheme expressed in SA unhappiness with the with/without fly ash layout expressed in WA Vic movement of data online has resulted in significantly higher apparent usage NWR timing No major complaints about the proposed quicker timing Data NSW (NWR data requires ministerial sign-off); Qld regulated waste data (processing backlog) Consultant commitment made not to estimate data unless outside the agreed timeframe National standard for non-hazardous waste data and reporting Some concerns, especially from attendees involved in regulation, the potential scale of the task and risks to jurisdictions (e.g. reference in enforcement activities, confusion where national definitions vary from jurisdictional definitions) Underlying support for some initiative, and strong support from some Much of the concern was mollified by reference to a ‘this is we want to get to’ type of document Could include standard densities, definitions of resource recovery, diversion, etc. Other Inter-jurisdictional transfers of non-hazardous waste are poorly recorded, leading to errors in comparisons of jurisdictional generation and recovery rates e.g. Vic imports recyclables (major export of landfill waste from NSW to Qld is well recorded) We may be missing some energy recovery via co-burning of in coal-fired power stations in NSW – other jurisdictions? Text contributions to the NWR universally seen as both burdensome and worthwhile China closure is a major issue and must be discussed Tas has large gap in C&D data because can be used as ‘fill’ – can maybe estimate The tables overleaf follow from the workshops’ outcomes. Table 4 follows from issue no. 1; Table 5 follows from issue no. 6. Definitions of recovery or recycling applied in jurisdictional reporting Definition applied Compared with definition #1, this excludes Material streams / locations where this definition is known to be applied Comments 1. “Materials collected for recovery or recycling” not applicable Container deposit materials from NT Unprocessed recyclables exported Export of unprocessed recyclables will significantly diminish due to China ban 2. “Materials processed Process residuals All recovered materials within Qld, SA, Tas, Vic and WA For the NWR 2016, data was requested to be
Figure Example of a ‘tree map’ diagram Figure Example of a multiples’ presentation Table Review of data visualisation software options Software & description Cost Outputs Output format Pros Cons Microsoft Standard program from the ‘Office’ suite Depends on version license. However assumed to be no marginal cost as is ubiquitous Static charts and tables As images to static reports - Familiarity - Existing license (free) - Does not support interactivity - Limited visualisation options - Difficult to manage large volumes of visualisations - Requires most manual design and 'workarounds' Microsoft Power BI Desktop Authoring software for bringing together different data sources (e.g. Excel files, databases etc.) in a 'model', which is then the basis of an interactive visual report and/or dashboard. Note: in this case the 'Report' can be multiple pages of charts and tables, Free - Static charts and tables - Interactive charts and tables in a report or dashboard 1. As images to static reports (exported via images to PowerPoint reports) 2. As an individual file for others to view/edit in Power BI Desktop 3. As publicly published to the internet (able to be embedded - Free to author and distribute - Connected to the Microsoft technology 'stack', so similar feel and functionality to Excel - Richer visualisation options - Publishing to websites is public only (i.e. no private sharing)
whereas a 'dashboard' is a single page summary output. in websites for public consumption) - Robust data modelling (i.e. connected to raw data) Microsoft Power BI Pro This extends Power BI Desktop to allow sharing and collaboration between colleagues (i.e. sharing of visualisation reports/dashboards within a private organisation). Note: This is more targeted at regular (e.g. hourly, weekly, monthly, etc.) reporting and app building for internal business intelligence purposes $12.70 per user per month As per MS Power BI Desktop As above plus 4. As interactive reports/dashboards able to be shared within an organisation 5. Embedded into apps (for computers and mobile) As plus - Can be used to share/collaborate privately within an organisation - Cost of licensing for all 'users', including authors and consumers/readers of the reports’ Tableau Desktop Authoring software for bringing together different data sources (e.g. Excel files, databases etc.) in a 'model', which is then the basis of an interactive visual report and/or dashboard. Note: Functionality and purpose is similar to Microsoft BI Desktop Free 1. Static charts and tables 2. Interactive charts and tables in a report or dashboard 1. As images to static reports (export to PDF) 2. As an individual file for others to view/edit in Tableau Desktop 3. As publicly published to the internet (able to be embedded in websites for public consumption) vs BI Desktop - Richer visualisation and interactivity options vs Power BI Desktop - Less familiarity for users of MS services - Potentially higher learning curve - Cost (for Professional) Tableau Desktop (Professional) The Professional version is a paid service that extends Tableau Desktop to work in a private organisation (note: potentially with "Tableau Server" as an added cost). Note: Functionality and purpose is similar to Microsoft Power BI Professional $70 per user per month As per Tableau Public As above plus 4. As interactive reports/dashboards able to be shared within an organisation 5. Embedded into apps (for computers and mobile)
Table Agreed expansions of the scope of wastes covered in the NWR 2018 Expansion Data source(s) Rationale Comments and notes Local government data quantities, particularly of recyclables services, particularly the availability of kerbside services by jurisdiction States and territories Adds to the report Suggested by 2 consultees Adequate data is readily available (see Table 13) Will go in a section and not form part of the ‘total waste’ quantities reported. Will not be nationally comprehensive. Budget impost approx. $5k. Product and packaging including product stewardship products e-waste (beyond TVs & computers) other products as available container deposit system data Australian Packaging Covenant data the Department existing BE/REC modelling states and territories states and territories APCO Adds to the report Commitment of our project proposal Inclusion of CDS data suggested by 2 consultees Will go in a stand-alone section and not form part of the ‘total waste’ quantities reported. Tip shop data States and territories Adds depth to the report Generally supported by states & territories Adequate data is readily available Will be the focus of a stand-alone section titled ‘waste reuse’. Would not form part of the ‘total waste’ quantities reported. Will not be nationally comprehensive. Litter and dumping data States and territories Adds depth to the report Generally supported by states & territories Adequate data is readily available to support commentary on scale and cost Will be a focus of a separate section (see Table 20). Would not form part of the ‘total waste’ quantities reported. Will not be nationally comprehensive. Budget impost approx. $5k. Mining waste Headline Economic Values of Waste project report and/or industry (major companies) Adds depth to the report ‘First-cut’ data available Suggested by 3 consultees We will advise industry of the plan to include the HEVW data unless they have better data. Budget impost approx. $5k. Waste to stockpiles and long-term storages States and territories; Stockpiles project Adds depth to the report Seen as major issue by states & territories Unlikely to be nationally comprehensive.
Liquid wastes BoM (2017) Requirement of the project brief Agreed to include in NWR at the project inception workshop Will go in a section and not form part of the ‘total waste’ quantities reported. NWR 2018 introduction would make clear the report is primarily about solid waste. Investigation, and inclusion if data is adequate Agricultural wastes – manures and slurries from chicken, cow and pig feedlots; cotton mill mud; sugar cane bagasse ARENA (Charlotte Rouse) Suggested by 2 consultees Would go in a stand-alone section and not form part of the ‘total waste’ quantities reported. Unlikely to be nationally comprehensive. Would be estimated via factor x activity. Table Other expansions in the scope of the NWR 2018 Expansion Data source(s) Rationale Comments and notes The Australian waste sector, including discussion on infrastructure types and numbers by state and territory States and territories sources as appropriate Adds depth to the report Provides a ‘home’ for the industry association written contributions Will go in a stand-alone section Budget impost approx. $5k. Economic value of the waste sector Headline economic values of waste project report Adds depth to the report Data available Can go in the ‘Australian sector’ section. Significant waste fires (stockpiles, landfills etc., incl. link to lithium ion batteries) ISF report for the Department; states and territories Adds depth to the report Data available Can go in ‘Current and emerging challenges’ section Disaster waste States and territories Adds depth to the report Can go in ‘Current and emerging challenges’ section Table Increasing the depth of the detail and discussion included in the NWR 2018 Agreed inclusion Rationale, comments and
More detailed breakdown of source by industry sector (C&I). Disaggregation by source sector is to be as set out in Figure 10. Will investigate whether the breakdown supports an estimate of generated at the post-consumption and production waste levels. In the ‘current and emerging challenges section’, discussions on: stockpiles China bans circular economy (enhanced from NWR 2016 text) plastics in the ocean disaster waste major waste fires a significant with the states and territories and at least some data is available from them and the recent Department stockpiles project a issue that cannot be avoided discussed in the NWR 2016 but could be enhanced with more detail and news on programs also touched on in the NWR 2016 but is increasingly important and could be addressed more fully, including drawing on the Senate inquiry report and investigating whether any data is available to estimate quantities and types. Focus on urban vs regional where possible, e.g. the texts on infrastructure and domestic services Touched on in the context section of the NWR 2016 but could also be considered in the local government and waste sector sections. For each state and territory, discuss: waste management highlights e.g. infrastructure, recycling plants, challenges (e.g. Tas), wins data peculiarities e.g. Tas C&D data uncertainties Suggested by states & territories and/or stakeholders. Invite contributions from ALGA and Boomerang Alliance Suggested by the Boomerang Alliance. BA acts as a peak community body in relation to waste issues. Discussion on drivers for future quantities of waste Several consultees raised issues about future waste and projections. We do not believe projections are a good idea as there is too much uncertainty, but the issue could be addressed through text.
can also be extracted as static images for PDF reports, breaking the link between data and report. Specialist visualisation tools generally provide more options for richer visualisations/types of charts. The default visualisations can be interacted with, for example, (cross) filtering options, hover/pop up information and highlights. Available visualisations are limited by the options in MS Excel. Any interactive reports can be quickly refreshed to reflect the updated data (including subsequent years’ data) Updating data in charts and tables involves updating the data model and reissuing any PDF reports. Types of visualisation We provide below a preliminary draft list of visualisations and forms that we plan to include in the NWR 2018. The list is not intended to be comprehensive or final – there will inevitably be a degree of and error in building the visualisations in the NWR 2018. Blue Environment will ensure the Department is kept informed of these trials and any proposed changes. Note that the planned graphics respond to stakeholder feedback as well as Little Sketches’ specialist review. Agreement We will rely mainly on the visualisation tabulated below. Visualisation types for the NWR 2018 Type Description for NWR 2018 (illustration taken from NWR 2016) Contrast with approach in NWR 2016 Infographics Data is mixed with icons to represent elements such as factories, houses, trucks and landfills Not used Sankey infographics Flow data with arrow widths proportional to flow size (in tonnes) is mixed with icons – see Figure 13 Not used Stacked bar charts Different colours (see Section 4.5.4) Will not show data (see Section 4.5.5) Lighter lines Direct labelling where possible Will not show recovery rate data – addressed separately Small multiples charts + line charts See Figure 9. We plan to use a line chart above the ‘small multiples’ display to show ‘per capita’ trends’ where appropriate Different colours (see Section 4.5.4) Will not show data (see Section 4.5.5) Per capita rates shown in a smaller chart directly above
Figure An example of a Sankey infographic Note: This figure is produced for illustrative purposes only. The icons are ‘free’ versions – for the NWR 2018 we propose to pay for more appropriate graphics. Some figures are dummy numbers. The elements included are likely to change and expand – for example, the final figure will also show waste exports. Specific visualisations Table 26 lists the main visualisations we plan to include in the NWR 2018. Key observations about this list: it is affected by the planned shift in focus away from presentation by state and territory to presentation by flow concept (generation, recycling, energy recovery, disposal, recovery rate), as set out in Table 21 on page 42 the areas covered in the NWR 2016 are nearly all covered in the list, but we do not plan to present recovery rates by source sector for each state and territory. Table Draft list of key visualisations Section Type Description At a glance Sankey infographic Macro-level waste flows in Australia, showing sources, management and fates (similar to Figure 13) Generation section Stacked bars Generation split by source sector, material, management, jurisdiction Small multiples + line chart Overall trends in generation by source sector (absolute) + per capita Recycling section Infographic of material to recycling showing the different ‘data points’ (collected, processed, taken offsite) Stacked bars Recycling split by source sector, materials, jurisdictions Small multiples + line chart Trends in recycling by source sector (absolute) + per capita Energy recovery section Stacked bars Energy recovery split by technology type, materials, jurisdictions Small multiples + line chart Trends in energy recovery by source sector (absolute) + per capita Disposal section Infographic Flows of waste to landfill showing source sector and energy recovery component Stacked bars Disposal split by source sector, material, jurisdiction multiples + line chart Trends in to landfill showing disposal and energy recovery + per capita Recovery rates section Stacked bars Bar for each state showing percentage recycled and recovered for energy multiples Trends in recovery rates by source sector
Structure of the National Waste Report 2018 Based on the agreed changes set out above, a draft table of contents for the NWR 2018 is given below. Draft table of contents of the NWR 2018 Section heading Comments and coverage At a glance Introduction and definitions, report structure and data layout, data uncertainty Waste generation Concepts, data. Includes mining waste. Recycling Concepts, data, exports v. onshore (incl. waste to China & affected by bans), ref. to WA C&D stockpiles Energy recovery Concepts, data, calorific values Disposal Concepts, data. Includes long-term storages. Resource recovery rates Concepts, data Wastes by type Status, trends, going into more detail by type. Select ag. wastes (as listed in Table 19) may be included in the ‘organics’ section International comparisons A report by Eunomia (2017) will help improve this component Role of states and territories Overview, inventory of policies, contributions from states & territories, highlights, data peculiarities, uncertainties Local government waste management Overview, services, quantities, composition, written contribution from ALGA The waste sector Overview, economic value, infrastructure, written contributions from industry associations Waste products Product stewardship waste E-waste Other products To the extent data is readily available Packaging waste Concepts, data APCO data APCO has agreed to provide its data for inclusion CDS data Reuse Tip shops Litter and dumping Concepts, data – can refer to the broader term ‘waste crime’ Liquid waste Current and emerging challenges Concise discussion incl. stockpiles, bans, plastics in ocean, circular economy, waste fires, disaster waste, plus contribution from Boomerang Alliance Context Population growth Economic growth Access to recycling markets Carbon policy Drivers of future waste generation /mgt Method