United States Solid Waste and
Environmental Protection Emergency Response EPA530-X-93-006C
Agency (5306) December 1993
EPA In-Depth Studies of
Recycling and
Composting Programs:
Designs, Costs,
Results
Volume III: Urban Areas
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
In-Depth Studies of
Recycling and
Composting Programs:
Designs, Costs/ Results
Volume HI: Urban Areas
-------
This work was performed for USEPA by the Institute for Local Self-
Reliance. The Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), a nonprofit
research and educational organization, provides technical information
and assistance to city and state government, citizen and neighborhood
organizations, and industry.
In-Depth Studies of Recycling and Composting Programs: Designs,
Costs, Results; Volume I - Rural Communities, Volume II - Suburbs
and Small Cities, and Volume III - Urban Areas is part of an ongoing
series of technical reports prepared by the ILSR staff. For more
information on the Institute's philosophy, publications, and practice,
write:
Institute for Local Self-Reliance
2425 18th St. NW
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 232-4108
Fax (202) 332-0463
-------
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements vii
Abbreviations viii
Conversion Factors x
Introduction ;.. 1
Case Study Format and Data Definitions 4
Data Definitions 4
Information in Case Studies 6
Case Studies
Austin, Texas 9
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery 10
Materials Recovery Overview 12
Recycling Activities 13
Residential Curbside Recycling 13
Multi-unit Collection 14
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling. 14
Self Haul and Drop-off Center 15
Salvage/Reuse 16
Processing and Marketing Recydables 16
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement 17
Composting Activities 17
Curbside Collection 18
Composting Site 18
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered 19
Publicity and Education 20
Economics 21
Capital Costs 21
Operating and Maintenance Costs 22
Future Solid Waste Management Plans 23
Contacts 23
Berkeley, Calif ornia 25
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery 26
Materials Recovery Overview 28
Recycling Activities 29
Residential Curbside Recycling 29
Multi-unit Collection 30
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling 31
Drop-off Centers 32
Salvage/Reuse 32
Construction and Demolition Debris Recovery 33
Processing and Marketing of Recyclable* 34
Page i
-------
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement 34
Composting Activities 35
Backyard Composting 35
Curbside Collection..' 35
Composting Site 36
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered 37
Source Reduction Initiatives 39
Publicity and Education. 40
Economics 40
Capital Costs ., 41
Operating and Maintenance Costs 42
Future Solid Waste Management Plans 43
Contacts .43
Lincoln, Nebraska 47
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery 48
Materials Recovery Overview 49
Recycling Activities 51
Residential Curbside Recycling 51
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling 52
Drop-off Centers 53
Construction & Demolition Debris Recovery 54
Salvage/Reuse 54
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables. 54
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement 55
Composting Activities 55
Curbside Collection 56
Composting Site 56
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered 57
Source Reduction Initiatives 58
Publicity and Education. 58
Economics 58
Capital Costs 59
Operating and Maintenance Costs 60
Future Solid Waste Management Plans 61
Contact 61
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina 63
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery.. 64
Materials Recovery Overview 66
Recycling Activities 67
Residential Curbside Recycling 67
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling 68
Drop-off Centers 69
Salvage/Reuse : 69
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables, 69
Composting Activities 70
Pageii
-------
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered 71
Publicity and Education. 72
Economics 72
Capital Costs 73
Operating and Maintenance Costs 74
Future Solid Waste Management Plans 75
Contacts 75
Newark, New Jersey 77
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery 78
Materials Recovery Overview 79
Recycling Activities . 81
Residential Curbside Recycling 81
Multi-unit Collection 82
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling 83
Drop-Off Centers 84
Salvage/Reuse 84
Processing and Marketing of Recyclable Materials 85
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement 86
Composting Activities 86
Curbside Collection 87
Composting Site 88
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered 89
Source Reduction Initiatives 90
Publicity and Education 90
Economics 91
Capital Costs 92
Operating and Maintenance Costs 93
Future Solid Waste Management Plans 94
Contacts 95
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 97
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery 98
Materials Recovery Overview 99
Recycling Activities 101
Public Sector Curbside Recycling 101
Residential Block Corner Collection 102
Food Waste Collection 103
Office/Institutional Collection 103
Private Sector Curbside/Alley Recycling 104
Hospital Recycling Collection Programs 104
Drop-off Centers 105
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables 105
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement 106
Composting Activities 107
Backyard Composting 107
Curbside Collection 107
Page iii
-------
Composting Site. 108
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered 109
Publicity and Education 110
Economics Ill
Capital Costs. Ill
Operating and Maintenance Costs 112
Future Solid Waste Management Plans 113
Contacts.. 114
Portland, Oregon. 117
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery. 118
Materials Recovery Overview 120
Recycling Activities 122
Residential Curbside Recycling 122
Multi-unit Collection 123
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling 123
Drop-off Centers 124
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables 124
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement 125
Composting Activities 126
Backyard Composting 126
Curbside Collection 126
Composting Sites 127
Mixed Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Composting 128
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered 130
Publicity and Education 131
Economics ~ 131
Operating and Maintenance Costs 132
Sunflower Recycling Cooperative's Capital Costs 132
Future Solid Waste Management Plans 133
Contacts 133
Providence, Rhode Island 135
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery 136
Materials Recovery Overview 138
Recycling Activities 139
Residential Curbside Recycling 139
Multi-unit Recycling 140
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling 140
Drop-off Centers 142
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables. 142
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement 144
Composting Activities 144
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered 145
Source Reduction Initiatives 145
Publicity and Education •. 146
Pageiv
-------
Economics .an 146
Capital Costs. . 146
Operating and Maintenance Costs 147
Future Solid Waste Management Plans 147
Contacts 148
San Francisco, Calif ornia. 151
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery. 152
Materials Recovery Overview 154
Recycling Activities 155
Residential Curbside Recycling 155
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling 156
Self-haul and Drop-off Centers 158
Construction & Demolition Debris 159
Salvage/Reuse 159
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables. 159
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement 160
Composting Activities 161
Backyard Composting 161
ZooDoo Composting 161
TreeCycling Program 161
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered 162
Source Reduction Initiatives 163
Publicity and Education...., 163
Economics 164
Capital Costs 164
Operating and Maintenance Costs 165
Future Solid Waste Management Plans 165
Contacts 166
Seattle, Washington 167
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery 168
Materials Recovery Overview 169
Recycling Activities 171
Residential Curbside Recycling 171
Multi-unit Collection 172
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling 173
Self-haul and Drop-off Centers 174
Salvage/Reuse 175
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables 175
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement 176
Composting Activities 176
Clean Green Program 177
Backyard Composting 177
Curbside Collection 177
Composting Site 178
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered 179
Page v
-------
Source Reduction Initiatives 182
Publicity and Education. 182
Economics ~ 183
Capital Costs 183
Operating and Maintenance Costs 184
Future Solid Waste Management Plans 185
Contacts 185
Index 187
Pagevi
-------
Acknowledgements
This report was prepared for USEPA by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance and was made possible
by the patience, diligent data gathering, and hard work of many individuals. USEPA participants
included BUI MacLeod, Project Officer, Truett DeGeare, and Terry Grogan.
ILSR made dozens of phone calls to state and local recycling coordinators, solid waste professionals,
recyders, and local decision makers in order to identify communities to document. The assistance of
these individuals was invaluable in getting this project off the ground. Approximately 100 surveys
were sent to key contact people.
Although most information for the report came from municipal recycling coordinators and
Superintendents of Public Works, ILSR also made calls to local landfills, private refuse haulers,
processing centers, composting facilities, county and state solid waste officials, and local political
leaders to fill in our knowledge about various communities' recycling and composting programs.
In addition to the contacts listed in the case studies included in this report, people in the following
communities provided information on their materials recovery programs: San Diego, California;
Longmont, Colorado; Hartford and Manchester, Connecticut; Dade County and Orlando, Florida;
Barrington, Princeton, Urbana, and Woodstock, Illinois; Chelmsford, Hilltown Cooperative,
Longmeadow, and Springfield, Massachusetts; Ann Arbor, Michigan; Lexington, Durham and
Wilmington, North Carolina; Haddonfield, Park Ridge, Cherry Hill, and Woodbury, New Jersey;
Hamburg, Ithaca, and Ulster County, New York; Barrington, Rhode Island; and Burlington, Vermont.
We owe many thanks to the staff at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance. In particular, we
benefitted from the hard work of Jane Buckley, Pia MacDonald, Beth Mears, Renee Nida, Beverly
Salas, Vickie Smith, Deb von Roeder, and Jill Zachary. Cynthia Aldridge deserves special credit for
the production of this report, which was no easy task. We would like to extend special recognition to
Janet Rumble, an intern at ILSR, for her significant contribution to this report.
We thank Jodean Marks, copy editor, for her meticulous reading of this document, and Michael
Cannizzaro for his diligent work at the computer on many tasks, from making editorial changes to
creating pie charts.
Researching and writing In-Depth Studies of Recycling and Composting Programs: Designs, Costs,
Results, had the support of many people. Special thanks go to Daniel DeMocker and Marty Gelfand for
their patience and understanding.
Page vii
-------
Abbreviations
• Y-r
ANJR — Association of New Jersey Recyclers
BFI — Browning Ferris Industries
CCA — Container Corporation of America
CCC — Community Conservation Centers, Inc.
C&D—construction and demolition
C-E—Combustion Engineering
CEI—Citizens for Environmental Improvement
GFCs — chlorofluorocarbons
conuu—-commercial
CRC — Community Rehabilitation Center
CSWMB — California Solid Waste Management Board
CSWMP — Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan
DEM — Department of Environmental Management
DEQ — Department of Environmental Quality
DO — drop-off
DPW — Department of Public Works
EC—Ecology Center
EDF — Environmental Defense Fund
ENCORE — Environmental Container Reuse
EPA — Environmental Protection Agency
F — Fahrenheit
FCR — Fairfield County Recycling
FY — fiscal year
HANC — Haight-Ashbury Neighborhood Council
HOPE — high density polyethylene
ILSR — Institute for Local Self-Reliance
instit/inst — institutional
IPC — intermediate processing center
IPF — intermediate processing facility
Ib—pound
LDPE — low density polyethylene
MRF — materials recovery facility
MSW — municipal solid waste
NA — not available
NEED — New England Ecological Development
NoCAL — Northern California
OC — Occupational Center
O&M—operating and maintenance
OSCAR — Ocean State Cleanup and Recycling Program
PCB — polychlorinated biphenyl
PET — polyethylene terephthalate
PP —polypropylene
Pageviii
-------
PRO — Philadelphia Recycling Office
PROS—Portland Recycling Refuse Operators
PS — polystyrene
PSE&G — Public Service Electric and Gas
PSU — Portland State University
PVC — polyvinyl chloride
RCC — Recydables Collection Center
REA—Richmond Environmental Action
REI — Recycling Enterprises Inc.
RFP—request for proposal
RRT—Resource Recycling Technologies
SFCR — San Francisco Community Recyclers
SFRP — San Francisco Recycling Program
SLUG—San Francisco League of Urban Gardeners
SRMG—Sound Resource Management Group
SWA — Solid Waste Authority
SWAC — Solid Waste Advisory Commission
SWMA — Solid Waste Management Authority
SWMC — Solid Waste Management Center (Berkeley)
Solid Waste Management Corporation (Providence)
SWMP — Solid Waste Management Plan
TURF — Total Urban Recycling Facility
UC — University of California
WMI — Waste Management, Inc.
WUTC — Washington Utility Transportation Commission
Page ix
-------
De
Sample Conversion Factors
Waste generation rates used in this report are based on tonnage figures provided by recycling
coordinators and other local officials, who may have estimated the data or relied on other sources,
such as private haulers. In a few instances, ILSR staff obtained tonnage data directly from the private
sector. Communities, in several cases, measure materials in cubic yards and use conversion factors to
calculate tonnage figures. When local conversion factors were unavailable, ILSR staff estimated
tonnage recovered using commonly accepted conversion factors. Sample conversion factors utilized in
this report are listed below.
MIXED MSW (compacted)
Conversions Used By Communities:
„-,]. 785Ibs/cy(0.39tons/cy) or 255cy/ton
Source: Solid Waste Management Plan Revision, Sonoma Co., CA, May 1990.
6671bs/cy (0.33ton/cy)
Source: Naperville, IL
Conversions Found in the Literature:
500-700 Ibs/cy (0.25 - 035 tons/cy) or 2.8 - 4 cy/ton
Source: Solid Waste Data: A Compilation of Statistics on Solid Waste Management Within the United
States, US EPA, August, 1981.
600 Ibs/cy (03 tons/cy) or 33 cy/ton
Source: Association of New Jersey Recyclers (ANJR), Directory, 1987.
MIXED MSW (uncompacted)
200Ibs/cy
Source: Solid Waste Data: A Compilation of Statistics on Solid Waste Management Within the United
States, US EPA, August 1981.
MIXED YARD WASTE (average compaction)
Conversions Found in the Literature:
600 Ibs/cy
Source: Yard Waste Composting, US EPA, April 1989.
Conversions Used By Communities
6201bs/cy
Source: Recycled Wood Products, Berkeley, CA
650-750 Ibs/cy
Source: Portland, OR
660Ibs/cy
Source: West Palm Beach, FL
MIXED YARD WASTE Goose)
200-250 Ibs/cy or 9 cy/ton
Source: Portland, OR
Pagex
-------
LEAVES (average compaction)
500 Ibs/cy (320 - 500 Ibs/cy)
Source: Yard Waste Composting - A Study of Eight Programs, US EPA, April 1989.
450Ibs/cy
Source: ANJR Directory, 1987.
1,000 Ibs/cy
Source: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
LEAVES (vacuumed)
7001bs
Source: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
LEAVES Goose)
250-350 Ibs/cy
Source: ANJR Directory, 1987.
CHIPPED BRUSH
500Ibs/cy
Source: National Recycling Coalition, 1989
COMPOST (finished)
1,500 Ibs/cy
Source: Yard Waste Composting, US EPA, April, 1989.
CHRISTMAS TREES
20 Ibs/tree
Source: Summary of County-Wide Christmas Tree Recycling Project 1990-1991, Garbage Reincarnation,
Inc., Sonoma Co., CA.
15.1 Ibs/tree
Source: Dakota County, MN
FOOD WASTE
500 Ibs/cy (residential)
800 -1000 Ibs/cy (commercial)
Source: Suhr, J.L., Higgins, A.J. and Derr, D.A., Feasibility of Food Waste Recycling in New Jersey:
Fourth Quarterly Report to the Office of Recycling, 1984.
900 Ibs/cy (commercial)
Source: Asheville/Buncombe County Solid Waste Alternatives: Planning Workbook, ILSR, March 1985.
WATER
8.345 Ibs/gal
Source: Lindeburg, Michael R., Engineering Unit Conversions, 2nd ed., 1990.
USED MOTOR OIL
7Ibs/gal (65-75Ibs/gal)
Source: ANJR Directory, 1987. Range was arrived at by converting API gravity for 25-50% crude oil to
specific gravity (Perry's Chemical Engineers' Handbook, 6th ed.).
CONCRETE/ASPHALT (broken)
15 tons/cy
Source: American Rock and Asphalt, Richmond, CA.
Page xi
-------
-------
Introduction
The Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR) prepared this report of 30 U.S. recycling and composting
programs under a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Under Phase I of
this project, the ILSR gathered data on source-separation recycling and composting programs of 30
communities. This included program characteristics, waste generation and recovery tonnages, materials
recovery rates, and equipment and operating and maintenance costs.
As the performance of established recycling and composting programs improves, and as newer programs
benefit from their experience, the country's learning curve on materials recovery is accelerating.
Nevertheless, communities continue to need detailed information about the quantities of waste they
generate, how much of this they can recover, and the costs this entails. Such data are useful not only to
evaluate one's own performance and progress, but also as a way to compare oneself to others.
The Institute has been working to fill this information gap. Our reports Beyond 25 Percent: Materials
Recovery Comes of Age (1989) and Beyond 40 Percent: Record-Setting Recycling and Composting
Programs (1990) detail how 24 communities are recovering between 24 and 57 percent of their waste
streams. We produced these reports for two reasons: (1) to share the experience of the pioneers with
those just starting up programs, and (2) to encourage communities to refine our methodology and improve
their own data gathering. This report, In-Depth Studies of Recycling and Composting Programs:
Designs, Costs, Results, continues to meet these objectives, while expanding our data base of outstanding
recycling programs.
During fall 1990, Institute staff surveyed hundreds of recycling coordinators and solid waste managers
by telephone and mailed nearly 100 written questionnaires. Based on the responses we received, the
ILSR and EPA staff selected 26 municipalities and 4 counties to document for this study. Seven of these
localities had been included in Beyond 40 Percent.
Almost half of the communities in this compendium were chosen because of their high recovery levels
(either in the residential, commercial, or construction and demolition debris sector). Other communities
were selected on the basis of location, population density, or model program characteristics such as
source reduction initiatives, food waste recovery, or salvage/reuse operations. To facilitate
comparisons and discussion of the factors that have led to successful programs, we also included several
communities whose recovery levels had remained low over a number of years. Communities selected for
study represent a balance of program characteristics: public and private collection, segregated and
Page 1
-------
commingled set-out, sorting en route and sorting at an intermediate processing center, curbside and drop-
off, bottle bUfelocales, mandatory and voluntary participation, volume-based and flat refuse rates.
-e a
The table on the following page lists the 30 communities documented in this report, their populations,
and their residential, commercial/institutional, municipal solid waste, and total waste recovery
levels. We gathered and documented data using a uniform methodology so as to facilitate comparison
and make the information accessible. (See section on Data Definitions and Case Study Format.) This
report presents detailed data in case study format in three volumes: I: Rural Communities; JL Suburbs
and Small Cities; and ///: Urban Areas.
Volume I: Rural Communities details the characteristics of eight rural recycling and composting
programs, including one county program. It presents information for planning and evaluating rural
programs such as descriptions of model drop-off centers, salvage/re-use operations, co-collection
(collecting refuse and recydables together), small-scale/low technology processing centers, food waste
recovery programs, and collective marketing techniques.
Volume II: Suburbs and Small Cities documents 12 programs in suburbs and cities with populations under
100,000, including two county programs. It describes successful residential curbside recycling programs,
comprehensive composting programs (including backyard composting), commercial and institutional
recycling initiatives, and multi-unit collection programs.
Volume III: Urban Areas covers 10 urban locales, including one county program. It provides information
for designing successful recycling and composting programs in high-density urban areas. These include
residential curbside collection programs that target multi-unit and apartment buildings, commercial
and institutional recycling and composting, food waste collection, construction and demolition debris
recovery, and materials processing and marketing.
Under Phase II of this project, the ILSR is producing a report summarizing and analyzing the data
gathered and documented under Phase I. This accompanying report will detail how communities can
maximize recovery rates by integrating the best features of the best programs.
Page 2
-------
Selected Recycling and Composting Programs
Community
Population Year Data Residential Commercial MSW Total
Collected Recovery Recovery Recovery Recovery
Rate Rate Rate Rate
2,189
2,378
4,305
10.220
5,239
388,222
10,861
9,214
FY90
1990
1990
1989
1990
1990
1990
9/89-8/90
Volume I: Rural Communities
Bowdoinham, ME
Fennimore, Wl
La Crescent, MN
Monroe, Wl
Peterborough, NH
Sonoma County, CA
Upper Township, NJ
Wapakoneta, OH
Volume II: Suburbs/Small Cities
Bertn Twnshp, NJ
Boulder, CO
Columbia, MO
Dakota County, MN
King County, WA
Lafayette; LA
Lincoln Park, NJ
Naperville, IL
Perkasie, PA
Takoma Park, MD
West LJnn, OR
West Palm Beach, FL
5,620
88,000
69,101
274,016
991,060
90.000
10,978
85,351
7,878
16,900
16,557
62,530
1990
1990
FY90
1990
1990
FY90
1990
1990
1990
1990
1990
4/90-3/91
Volume III: Urban
Austin, TX
Berkeley, CA
Lincoln, NE
Mecklenburg Co., NC
Newark, NJ
Philadelphia, PA
Portland, OR
Providence, Rl
San Francisco, CA
Seattle, WA
Areas
465,622
102,724
191,972
511,433
275,221
1,633,826
440,000
160,728
723,959
516,259
FY89
FY91
1990
1990
1989
FY90
1990
1990
1990
1990
NA
51%
41%
32%
42%
15%
50%'
NA
56%
33%
11%
29%
19%
13%
49%
32%
52%
36%
NA
22%
7%
NA
3%
7%
10%*
6%*
NA
10%
37%
45%
NA
25%
9%
27%
4%
10%
34% t
NA
61%
12%
NA
24%
36%
8%
70%
NA
NA
NA
NA
0%
NA
NA
25%
22%
46% t
16%t
NA
13%
18%
40%
NA = not available
54%
38%
29%
28%
19%
11%
NA
20%
57%
22%
NA
28%
30%
11%
62%
NA
NA
NA
50%
13%
NA
22%
12%
16%
NA
12%
33%
11%
26%
40%
53%
NA
41%
50%
18%
11%
43%
NA
NA
16%
13%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
46%
12%
15%
38%
52% *
NA
30%
11%
NA
NA
27%
NA
Key. FY = fiscal year MSW = municipal solid waste
AfolM: Total waste is the sum of municipal solid waste and construction and demolition (C&D) debris. Recovery rate include
material recycled and composted. MSW Recovery Rate may take into account tonnages that cannot be broken down into
commercial and residential, such as bottle bill tonnages or landscapers' waste. All recovery rates represent proportions by weight.
• Publicly collected waste.
t Privately collected waste.
t Based on 133,167 tons of C&D utilized as landfill cover. If this tonnage is excluded from waste recovered and disposed, recovery
rate drops to 30%.
Page3
-------
Case Study Format and Data Definitions
Vhei
Each case^study in this report is divided into several parts: Demographics, Solid Waste Generation
and Recovery, Materials Recovery Overview, Recycling Activities, Composting Activities, Amount and
Breakdown of Materials Recovered, Education and Publicity, Economics, and Future Solid Waste
Management Plans. While tonnage and economic data are generally based on 1990, descriptions of
program characteristics may reflect changes made since. This section's figures explain the data that
we have gathered and documented, and how we define certain terms. The first part of this section
defines terms used throughout these case studies. These definitions apply to this report only. The
second part of this section explains what information is contained in each section of the case studies.
Data Definitions
Collection Capital Costs — costs of acquiring equipment used to collect recyclable or compostable
materials.
Commercial/Institutional Waste Recovered, Disposed, and Generated — the annual tonnage of waste
recovered, disposed, and generated by the commercial and institutional sectors (excluding medical
wastes). The commercial sector includes theaters, retail establishments, hotels, and restaurants. The
institutional sector includes hospitals and schools.
Composted Waste — discarded organic materials processed into a soil amendment, fertilizer, and/or
mulch.
Composting — recovering discarded organic materials for processing into a soil amendment, fertilizer,
and/or mulch.
Construction and Demolition (C&D) Debris Recovered, Disposed, and Generated—the annual tonnage
of waste recovered, disposed, and generated as a result of construction and demolition activities. This
waste may include concrete, asphalt, tree stumps and other wood wastes, metal, and bricks. (While
C&D waste often burdens municipal solid waste collection and disposal systems, the U.S. EPA and the
National Recycling Coalition and this report exclude C&D debris from the definition of municipal
solid waste.)
Deposit Containers Recycled — the annual tonnage of beverage containers recycled as a result of state or
local bottle bills.
Disposed Waste — waste landfilled or incinerated.
Generated Waste — sum of waste recovered and waste disposed.
Intermediate Processing — preparing collected recyclable materials for end-use manufacturing.
Processing typically includes sorting, contaminant removal, and crushing or baling.
Mandatory — whether citizens are required to source-separate materials for recycling. In several
communities, citizens may be required to set out certain materials at curbside for recycling. In others it
may simply be illegal to set these out with refuse. Not all materials collected are designated as
mandatory.
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Reco- red, Disposed, and Generated — sum of residential and
commercial/institutional wastes recover:-. disposed, and generated. In some cases, MSW also includes
deposit containers recovered, yard "••• • ^e composted from landscapes and waste self-hauled to
disposal and recovery facilities. MSW excludes construction and demolition debris.
Page 4
-------
Participation Rate (%) — the portion of households served that take part in the curbside collection
program for recyclable materials. Refer to the case studies for an explanation of the specific method of
calculation.
Private Sector Waste — waste collected by private haulers independent of the public sector.
Processing Capital Costs (Composting)—costs of acquiring equipment used to process—compost, chip, or
mulch—organic materials. Processing or composting equipment typically includes shredders or chippers
and front-end loaders.
Processing Capital Costs (Recycling) — costs of acquiring equipment used to process recyclable materials
in preparation for marketing to end users. Processing typically includes sorting, contaminant removal,
and crushing or baling.
Public Sector Waste—waste collected by public crews or by private haulers under public contract.
Recovered Waste — sum of waste recycled and waste composted.
Recycled Waste — discarded products and packaging materials recovered for reuse and/or processing
into new products.
Recycling — recovering discarded products and packaging materials for reuse and/or processing into new
products. In this report, recycling does not include composting.
Refuse — waste destined for disposal facilities (incinerators or landfills).
Residential Waste Recovered, Disposed, and Generated — the annual tonnage of waste recovered,
disposed, and generated from single-family and multi-unit residences and their yards. In Bowdoinham
and Wapakoneta, residential waste cannot be separated from commercial/institutional waste. The
definition of residential waste generated differs for Wapakoneta.
Self-hauled Waste — waste brought to recovery or disposal sites by residents or business/institutional
establishments. This waste cannot be divided into residential and commercial/institutional.
Source Reduction — waste prevention; that is, avoiding waste generation.
Source Separation — segregation of recyclable materials or yard waste from mixed waste to facilitate
recycling and composting of these materials.
Tipping Fees — the fees charged to haulers for delivering materials at recovery or disposal facilities.
Total Waste Recovered, Disposed/ and Generated — the sum of MSW and C&D recovered, disposed,
and generated.
Page 5
-------
Information in Case Studies
Demographics
The first page of each case study contains basic demographic information on the community: 1990
population, area, number of households, and number of businesses and institutions. Also included is a
brief description of each community detailing, when information is available, its location; whether it
is urban, rural, or suburban; per capita income; median household income; and major industries.
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
This section provides tonnage data on waste recycled, waste composted, and waste generated; tipping
fees at disposal facilities; and a description of how waste destined for disposal (refuse) is collected and
disposed, and the costs of doing so. ~" fr*
Tonnage data, reported in table format, generally represent 1990 annual figures, unless noted otherwise,
and are usually broken down into three sectors: residential, commercial/institutional, and construction
and demolition (C&D) debris. In some cases, tonnage figures cannot be broken down by these sectors, and
data are presented in a modified format
In Berkeley and Portland municipal solid waste is presented as a single sum because it cannot be broken
down into residential and commercial. •:: • <
In Newark and Philadelphia figures are broken down into public sector and private sector, where
public M?!-tor denotes waste collected by public crews or private haulers under public contract, and
private .tor denotes waste collected by private haulers independent of the public sector. In Newark,
privately collected waste includes C&D debris; as a result, MSW figures cannot be reported separately.
In Austin, San Francisco, and Seattle waste self-hauled to disposal or recovery facilities is listed
separately from residential and commercial wastes, since this tonnage cannot be broken down by sector.
In several case studies, deposit containers recovered as a result of bottle bills and landscapers' waste
composted are listed separately, since these wastes cannot be divided into residential and commercial
tonnages.
C&D tonnage figures are not tracked and thus not available in Providence. In Portland, C&D disposed
is available, but C&D recovered is not. In Seattle, C&D recovered is available, but C&D disposed is
not.
Footnotes accompanying tables clarify how numbers are calculated or estimated, where applicable,
what numbers represent, and what, if any, waste may be excluded. Tonnage figures for waste recycled
and composted are based on those reported in the Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
section.
Materials Recovery Overview
This section provides an overview of the community's recycling and composting activities, including
history and development of programs, and state and local legislative requirements.
Recycling Activities
This section details curbside and drop-off collection programs for recyclable materials for both the
residential and commercial/institutional sectors, and details how these materials are set out,
processed, and marketed. Where applicable, information on salvage/reuse activities, construction and
demolition debris recovery, market development, and recycled product procurement initiatives are also
included.
Page 6
-------
Composting Activities
This section details curbside and drop-off collection programs for yard waste and other organic
materials, and how these collected materials are composted, chipped, mulched, or otherwise processed
into a soil amendment. Where applicable, information on backyard composting programs is also
included.
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
This section lists, in table format, a tonnage breakdown of residential, commercial/institutional, and
construction and demolition materials recycled and composted by type. The tables list subtotals for
MSW recycled and composted, totals for MSW recovered and C&D debris recovered, and finally total
materials recycled, composted, and recovered. Where available, several years' worth of data are
provided.
Footnotes accompanying tables clarify, where applicable, how numbers are calculated or estimated,
what numbers represent, and what, if any, waste may be excluded.
Source Reduction Activities
This section describes, where applicable, any initiatives undertaken to reduce the amount of waste
generated. Generally, initiatives include volume-based refuse rates, "environmental shopping"
programs, and backyard composting.
Publicity and Education
This section details what programs are in place to educate citizens and/or commercial/institutional
establishments about recycling services—how and where to recycle—and to motivate mem to do so.
Economics
This section primarily provides information on capital equipment and operating and maintenance costs.
The Costs Cover subsection explains what costs are provided, who incurs these costs, and the programs
and tonnages these costs cover. Materials revenues, source of funding, and the number of full- and part-
time employees working on recycling and composting activities are also detailed.
Capital costs are generally listed in two tables: one lists equipment used for collection, and the other
lists equipment used for processing. (Processing recyclables typically includes sorting, contaminant
removal, and crushing or baling. Processing yard waste and other organic materials consists of
composting, chipping, or mulching; equipment for this purpose typically includes shredders or chippers
and front-end loaders.) Both these tables indicate the year equipment costs were incurred and the
purpose for which equipment is used—whether recycling or composting. If equipment is used for several
purposes, an estimated percentage of its time spent on recycling or composting is indicated; costs listed
represent the total cost of this equipment. Footnotes accompanying tables clarify who owns equipment,
whether equipment has been paid off, whether it was amortized, and/or whether it was owned prior to
implementation of recovery programs.
Operating and maintenance (O&M) costs represent annual costs as provided by each community and are
broken down into recycling costs and composting costs. These costs generally represent the costs incurred
by the local government of the community documented, and do not always reflect all the costs spent for
recycling and composting activities. For example, the State of Rhode Island, not the City of
Providence, pays for processing costs in Providence. Additional costs are often listed in table footnotes.
In some of the county case studies, we cannot calculate per ton costs for recycling or composting because
these counties incur costs only for certain aspects of the program, such as planning and
education/publicity.
Page 7
-------
, lei
Communities were asked to provide total O&M costs for their recycling and composting operations,
including collection, processing, administration and overhead, all labor, and education and publicity
costs. Where available, these breakdowns are provided. In many instances, curbside collection costs
are separated from dropoff costs, so these two can be compared. The costs for curbside collection, drop-
off collection, and processing often cover different tonnages. The tons covered by the costs are listed in
the operating and maintenance cost table, and are used to calculate per ton O&M costs. Because costs for
different activities cover different tonnages, the provided reakdowns of per ton costs cannot
necessarily be added together. Footnotes accompanying O&ta cost tables clarify who incurs costs, on
what cost figures are based, what costs, if any, are excluded, and, where applicable, how costs are
calculated.
Future Solid Waste Management Plans
This section describes solid waste management initiatives that each community plans to undertake in
the future.
hi..
Contacts, References/ and Endnotes
The names, titles, organizations, addresses, and phone/fax numbers are listed for those people who
were the primary sources of information on the community's recycling and composting activities. Under
References, we list any written materials that we used as general sources of information. Endnotes give
sources of information or clarifications for a particular statement.
PageS
-------
Austin, Texas
Austin,
Texas
Demographics
Jurisdiction: City of Austin
Population:
Area:
Total Households:
Total Businesses and
Institutions:
Brief Description:
465,622 in 1990
185 square miles
198,464 (112376 single-family households, 11,476 two-unit buildings, and
9,960 three- to four-unit buildings; 64,652 households are in buildings
with more than four units)
Not available
Austin, the capital of Texas, is home to federal, state, and local agencies.
Other major employers are educational institutions including the
University of Texas, the military (Bergstrom Air Force Base and Camp
Maybry), and computer and electronics firms. The City's annual per
capita income is $16,000; median household income is $29,700.
Page 9
-------
Austin, Texas
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
Annual Tonnages (October 1988 to September 1989)
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
Dlsposed§
Incinerated
Landfilled
Generated
Residential
17,573
13,387
4,186
236,891
0
236,891
254,464
Commercial/ Self
Institutional* Hault
13,312
13,312
0
NA
0
NA
NA
45,612
41,380
4,232
NA
0
NA
NA
Total Construction Total
MSW & Demolition* Waste
76,497
68,079
8,418
NA
0
NA
NA
0
0
0
NA
0
NA
NA
76,497
68,079
8,418
450,294
0
450,294
526,791
Percent by Weight Recovered
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
7%
5%
2%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0%
0%
0%
15%
13%
2%
Notes: Due to rounding, numbers may not add up to total.
Residential waste dteposed does not include bulky terns such as furniture and tires.
'Commercial/institutional tonnages are materials collected at curbskte by private haulers and nonprofit groups.
t Self-haul tonnages include recydabtes brought to private (for-profit) buy-back sites and scrap yards, and yard waste brought to
the Austin Community Gardens, as well as brush collected through the City's tree trimming program. This includes material
generated from both the residential and commercial sectors.
*None of Austin's largest waste haulers recycled construction and demolition debris in 1989, nor were they aware of any C&D
recycling in the City.
§White the City tracks tonnage figures of waste disposed from single-family households, some duplexes, and a number of three-
and four-unit buildings (160,000 tons in fiscal year 1989). it does not track the tonnage of waste disposed from condominiums,
apartment buildings with greater than four units, from commercial and institutional establishments, or from construction and
demolition sites.
An estimated 78,313 tons of waste were generated by apartment buildings with more than four units. Subtracting the 1,422 tons of
recydabtes collected at Ecology Action's drop-off sites (which service apartment buildings) from the estimated waste generated
from this sector, yields 76,891 tons of waste disposed from multi-unit buildings. This amount is included in the 236,891 tons of
residential waste disposed listed above. Waste generated from this sector is based on the following City statistics and estimates:
83,000 households in buildings with more than four units, 2.2 persons per household, and 2.35 pounds of residential waste
generated per person per day in these units. Total waste disposed is based on an average state waste generation rate of 6.2
pounds of residential, commercial, and C&D waste per person per day (provided by the Texas Department of Health). This figure
contains a small amount of industrial waste.
Landfill Tipping Fee:
City trucks do not pay a tipping fee at the Austin Municipal Landfill.
Tipping fees averaged $10 per ton in 1989, $10.75 in 1990, and $12.00 in
1991 at the Austin Community Landfill (WMI) and Sunset Hill Landfill
(BFI).
Page 10
-------
Austin, Texas
Total Waste Recovered and Disposed (Percent by Weight FY1989)
Disposed 85% _^^^^^^ Recovered 15%
Residential Disposed 45% ^^^^^^^^^^^^HJj^^^^. ^^ Residential Recycled 3%
Residential Composted 1%
Comm/lnst Recycled 3%
Self-Haul Recycled 8%
^^ MB^^ SeK-Haul Composted 1%
Other Disposed 40%
Note: Due to rounding, percentages do not add to 100%
Refuse Collection and The City of Austin collects refuse twice weekly from single-family and
Disposal: duplex units as well as a number of households in three- to four-unit
buildings. The City does not service condominiums but it does serve
businesses whose refuse set-out does not exceed that for single-family
households (i.e., home-based businesses). The City's cost for refuse
collection and disposal in fiscal year 1989 was $66 per ton. In 1989
residents serviced by the City paid a flat fee of $8.25 per month for refuse
collection. The fee increased to $9 per month in 1990 and will again
increase to $10.60 in November 1991. This fee, which includes curbside
collection of recyclables, will be replaced with volume-based refuse rates
in 1992. Citywide implementation of volume-based refuse rates will be
complete by 1993. (See Future Solid Waste Management Plans section.)
Ten private waste haulers collect refuse from the remaining multi-unit
buildings, businesses, and institutions. They also haul construction and
demolition debris. Private haulers include Central Texas Refuse,
Longhorn Disposal (Waste Management, Inc.), Texas Disposal Systems,
and BFI. Municipal haulers bring the majority of the City's refuse to the
Austin Municipal Landfill 10 miles from the City. Private haulers bring
refuse to the Sunset Farm Landfill and the Austin Community Landfill.
In winter 1991, Texas Disposal Systems was issued a permit to build a new
landfill in the southeast corner of Austin; the facility opened in July 1991.
Texas Disposal Systems chips and composts landdearing debris and yard
waste at the new facility, and operates a recycling drop-off center there.
Page 11
-------
Austin, ifcxos
Materials Recovery Overview
Goals and Legislative None
Require
Ecology Action, a nonprofit volunteer organization, initiated recycling in Austin in 1971 with the
opening of a recycling drop-off center. At first the center accepted only glass, steel, and aluminum cans,
but by 1980 Ecology Action had added newspaper and aluminum and ferrous cans, and operated nine
recycling drop-off centers. Ecology Action also collected newspaper at the University of Texas and
initiated a municipal office paper recycling program. In 1981 the market price for old newspaper
plummeted, and Ecology Action was forced to cut back operations. Austin citizens appealed to the City
Council to support local recycling activities and implement a curbside recycling program. In response,
the City in 1981 commissioned a consultant to develop a Solid Waste Management Strategy that would
include a pilot curbside recycling program, technical assistance for the development of composting
operations, construction of a waste incinerator and two new transfer stations, and permitting of a new
municipal landfill. A 600 ton-per-day incinerator was approved by referendum in 1984. However, in
1988, due to citizen groups' opposition, Austin cancelled plans for the incinerator after $16 million had
been spent on the project.
The City implemented a pilot curbside recycling program in February 1982 in which municipal
crews collected aluminum cans, newspaper, and glass from 3,000 single-family residences, 2 percent of
all city households. In 1983,12,000 households were served; by 1986,58,000 households were served. In
1989 crews serviced 110,000 one- to two-unit buildings and a number of three- and four-unit buildings, hi
FY 1989,7,347 tons of residential recydables were collected through the municipal curbside program; in
FY 1990,11,090 tons of recyclables were collected, an increase of over 50 percent. Approximately one-
half of the residential recydables recovered in Austin are collected through the municipal curbside
program. By 1991 municipal crews were collecting recydables from 111,500 households in one- to four-
unit buildings.
In the early stages of the City's program, Ecology Action processed and marketed recovered glass
and metals, while Consolidated Fibers and ACCO Waste Paper processed and marketed the
newspaper. In 1989 Austin awarded ACCO Waste Paper a 3-year contract to process all materials
collected through the curbside program.
Austin implemented a seasonal curbside leaf collection program in 1988. Leaves are composted
along with municipal sewage sludge. Other drop-off composting opportunities are offered year-round
at Austin Community Gardens, a nonprofit community organization.
Residents can drop off household hazardous waste, including batteries, pesticides, flammables, and
motor oil, on the annual Home Chemical Collection Day. Twelve-hundred gallons of paint were
reclaimed for local housing rehabilitation projects in 1989.
In 1988, after the cancellation of the incinerator, the Austin City Council appointed a 9-member
citizens' Solid Waste Advisory Commission to develop alternate solid waste management methods.
The Commission completed the Solid Waste Master Plan in June of 1990, and the City Council adopted
it unanimously the following September. City Staff developed a 5-year Business Plan based on this
Master Plan that calls for volume-based refuse rates, elimination of the second refuse collection day,
and year-round collection of yard waste. The Solid Waste Master Plan replaces the earlier plan
prepared by private consultants.
Page 12
-------
Austin, Texas
ElgSycling Activities
Residential Curbside Recycling
Start-up Date:
Service Provider:
Pick-up Frequency:
Same Day as Refuse
Households Served:
Mandatory:
Participation Rate:
Materials Collected:
Set-out Method:
Collection Method and
Vehicles:
Economic Incentives:
Enforcement:
Annual Tonnage
February 1982
The City of Austin Environmental and Conservation Services Department
collects recyclables from all households in one- to two-family units
including some three- and four-unit buildings. (In 1990 Longhorn Disposal
and Central Texas Refuse collected recyclables from a small number of
apartment buildings.)
Weekly
Yes
110,000 single- through duplex households (including some three- and
four-unit buildings) were served in 1989 with municipal curbside
collection. In 1991, 1,500 households were added to the municipal
program.
No
40 percent in 1989,55 percent in 1990,65 percent in 1991 (based on counting
weekly set-outs on several collection routes over a 6-week study period).
Newspaper, corrugated cardboard, glass, aluminum and ferrous cans
Residents bundle newspaper and cardboard or place them in paper bags.
Glass and metal containers are commingled in a separate container.
Austin initially distributed used 5-gallon containers to some households.
In 1991 the City distributed 25,000 14-gallon recycling bins to increase
household participation. (The City hopes to purchase an additional
100,000 bins with funding from local businesses. The businesses will be
allowed to place their logos on the containers in exchange for covering a
portion of the bins' cost)
Two-person crews load materials into Eager Beaver Recycler 6 Trailers
pulled by stake-bed trucks. Crews place paper and cardboard in one
compartment, and cans and glass in another. On dead-end streets,
collection crews use pick-up trucks instead of the Eager Beaver vehicles.
Austin tested a Kann Curbsorter truck and Crane Carrier truck in order to
determine the feasibility of one-person crews. (Initial results were less
than promising.) In the fall of 1991, the City ordered nine new Lodal
SA33 recycling trucks to replace the Eager Beaver vehicles over the next 3
years. Collection crews will be reduced from two to one, and crews will
collect materials from the right side only in areas with high
participation.
Private businesses award $100 per week to families that have set out
recyclable materials at curbside.
Not applicable. Although scavenging of aluminum cans has been a
problem in the City, Austin has not taken any action against scavengers
except for contacting them when possible and asking them to stop.
7,347 tons FY1989,11,090 in FY1990, and 13,323 tons in FY1991
Page 13
-------
Austin, Texas
Multi-unit Collection
Residents in multi-family buildings are encouraged to recycle materials at Ecology Action's drop-
off sites. Ecology Action has also established a recycling drop-off station at one 409-unit apartment
complex, with portable storage containers for glass and aluminum and ferrous cans, and dumpsters for
newspapers. In 1990 Central Texas Refuse and Longhom Disposal began to collect recyclables from
approximately 30 apartment buildings. Both haulers provide 95-gallon containers for separate
collection of newspaper, glass, and aluminum cans and empty bins on either a scheduled or an on-call
basis. In 1991 Texas Disposal Systems initiated collection of aluminum and newspaper from 12
apartment complexes.
Austin has begun to address the problem of the lack of recycling services to multi-unit buildings,
comprising more than one-third of the City's population. In January 1990, the Austin City Council
passed a Comprehensive Recycling Resolution, which included a provision to include a recycling
program for multi-family housing. In May 1990, the Austin Apartment Association initiated a series of
discussions regarding (he development of a comprehensive multi-unit recycling program. This led to
the formation of a task force, as an auxiliary body to the Solid Waste Advisory Commission (SWAC),
which included apartment owners, managers, residents, the Austin Tenants' Council, disposal
companies, and the City Environmental and Conservation Services Department. The task force
compiled a list of recommendations to the City, including both drop-off and on-site recycling
opportunities, provisions for containers, educational materials, and publicity.
Commercial & Institutional Curb side/Alley Recycling
Legislative
Requirements:
Service Provider:
Number Served:
Type Served:
Materials Collected:
Pick-up Frequency:
Set-out and Collection
Method:
Incentives:
None
Ecology Action, BFI, and Texas Disposal Systems
Ecology Action served approximately 150 businesses in 1989. BFI served
approximately 200 businesses. Texas Disposal Systems serves
approximately 20 businesses.
Offices, restaurants, bars, gas stations, banks, and grocery stores
Ecology Action collects most grades of paper including newspaper,
computer paper, file stock, white ledger, laser printer, high-grade
paper, and corrugated cardboard from office buildings; it collects glass
and aluminum and steel cans from restaurants. As of October 1991, due to
a depressed market, newspaper is no longer accepted. BFI collects
cardboard, (in 1990 BFI and Longhom Disposal began to collect high-
grade and mixed office paper from a small number of businesses.) In 1991
Texas Disposal Systems began collecting corrugated cardboard.
Varies. Some businesses are served weekly; others call vendors to
arrange pick-up.
Businesses sort recyclables by material type in 20-, 30-, and 40-gallon
fiberboard containers or in 55-gallon HDPE plastic barrels provided by
Ecology Action. BFI collects truck-load quantities of compacted
cardboard from supermarkets and other large businesses. In 1991 BFI set
out a total of 60 dumpsters for collection of cardboard from its
commercial customers.
None
Page 14
-------
Austin, Texas
Annual Tonnage Ecology Action collected 712 tons of recyclables in 1989. BFI tonnages
are not available.
Ecology Action began a municipal office paper recycling program in 1982, collecting materials free
of charge. In 1991 Ecology Action began to charge a sliding fee ranging from $35 to $45 per pick-up
because the market price for paper had declined and costs were exceeding revenues. The fee was based
on the quantity of materials set out for recycling and the ease of collecting the materials. Many
commercial accounts cancelled pick-up service, and office accounts dropped from 150 to 60. Ecology
Action also began to charge bars and restaurants for pick-up of recyclables in 1991. The nonprofit
charges $35 per 10-12 barrel pick-up of glass and a $45 charge if the pick-up includes corrugated
cardboard. Ecology Action will not pick up cardboard alone. A private recycler has continued to service
some businesses with free collection.
Since 1987 Central Texas Refuse has offered curbside collection of recyclables to residents at the
Bergstrom Air Force Base. At first, crews collected commingled newspaper, glass, and aluminum cans in
compactor trucks, but participation was low. In 1991 Central Texas Refuse cut back curbside collection to
newspaper only and set up five drop-off sites throughout the base for newspaper, glass, and aluminum
cans. Participation at these sites is also low.
By 1989 only a limited number of schools in Austin had instituted recycling. In 1990 Austin received
a grant from the Governor's Energy Management Center to develop a model school recycling program.
Ten city schools participated in a pilot project from February to May 1991. They collected newspaper,
high-grade paper, mixed paper including file stock and notebook paper, aluminum and tin cans, and
corrugated cardboard. Materials were emptied in centrally located 60-gallon barrels and paper
collection boxes for each classroom. Staff brought recyclables directly to buy-back centers, and the
small amount of revenues generated helped to cover costs and were used to fund school projects. As a
result of the cardboard collection, the most bulky item in the schools' waste stream, dumpsters in the
pilot school were reduced by several cubic yards each. The Governor's Office approved a 1-year
extension of the project to determine how to improve delivering materials to collection centers. "Keep
Austin Beautiful" developed an Adopt-A-Recycler program to finance the purchase of recycling
containers and provide transportation to buy-back centers. With standardized containers purchased
through this program, the schools will be better prepared to analyze their waste streams. A final
model plan will be completed in September of 1992. In addition, several of the pilot schools and some
other schools in the Austin School District composted yard waste for their organic gardening programs.
They built small composting bins, which students managed and used in the school gardens. One school
in a rural region of the City collected cafeteria food waste in 5-gallon plastic buckets. The waste was
fed to pigs belonging to one of the school custodians. Texas will formulate a statewide school recycling
program modeled after the results of the Austin pilot study.
Austin provides businesses with referrals of material buyers, collection services, and general
information on establishing in-house recycling programs. In April 1991, the Solid Waste Advisory
Commission created a Commercial Recycling Task Force representing haulers, businesses, and City
government to develop Austin's commercial recycling opportunities.
Self Haul and Drop-off Center
Number and Type 33, of which 16 are buy-back centers
Public or Private: All of Austin's drop-off centers are privately operated. Ten are operated
by Ecology Action, a local nonprofit organization. Ecology Action's
Landfill Diversion Center is privately run under contract with the City.
Page 15
-------
Austin, Texas
Sectors Served:
Materials Accepted:
Annual Tonnage:
Drop-off centers primarily service the residential sector.
centers service .the residential and commercial sectors.
Buy-back
istnai
Ecology Actiqn^ccepts newspaper, high-grade and mixed paper,
aluminum cans, ferrous cans, scrap metals, glass, HDPE and PET plastics
(PVC was added in 1991), and lead-acid batteries at its drop-off sites.
White goods are accepted at its Landfill Diversion Center. Several
Austin churches and schools accept aluminum cans, glass, and newspaper.
The Humane Society of Austin accepts newspapers.
ACCO Waste Paper runs a buy-back operation at its processing center,
which accepts newspaper, high-grade and mixed paper, aluminum cans,
ferrous cans, and glass. In 1990 the Center began to accept HDPE and PET
plastics, as well. Six buy-back centers/scrap yards accept aluminum cans,
batteries, and metals; four accept aluminum cans and metals; two accept
aluminum cans only; two accept lead-acid batteries only; and American
Fiber Mulch takes newspaper. The largest metal recycler. Commercial
Metals, places roll-off containers at the landfills for deposit of white
goods and appliances by residents.
2,134 tons were recovered through Ecology Action's 10 drop-off centers in
FY 1989.
Salvage/Reuse
As in many other communities throughout the country, organizations such as Goodwill and the
Salvation Army collect household items, small appliances, clothes, and other salvageable goods.
Austin tracked these materials through a survey and determined that 1/883 tons were collected in 1989.
Ecology Action operates a Landfill Diversion Center under contract with the City. In FY 1989 this
contract was $13,000. Residents are encouraged to bring bulky items, including white goods, to the center
to avoid a $10 landfill surcharge. The Center processes approximately 1.5 tons per day. In 1989
Ecology Action repaired and sold the white goods, or sold nonrepayable items as scrap metal. That
year, landfill customers brought 363 tons of recyclables, primarily large appliances and bulky scrap
metal, to the Diversion Center.
Processing and Marketing Recyclables
Municipal crews bring between 20 to 30 tons per day of glass and cans collected at curbside to the
ACCO Waste Paper Processing Center located in Austin (which was purchased by BFI in October 1990).
Built in 1989, ACCO also accepts recyclables from private haulers. The facility, which operates 280
days per year and is designed to process 400 tons per day, processes over 200 tons per day. The City pays
no tipping fee; ACCO Waste Paper pays the City for its recyclables. In fiscal year 1989, ACCO Waste
Paper paid $29.69 per ton; in 1990 the City received $20.02 per ton. Inside a 750-square-foot building, 20
developmentally disabled adults, employed through a local social service agency, hand-sort glass by
color on conveyor belts. The glass is crushed and stored in Gaylord boxes. Aluminum and steel cans are
separated and baled. City crews unload the paper outside onto a cement pad. There, five employees
sort out contaminants and set the paper onto a conveyor that leads into another building, where it is
baled. In 1990 ACCO Waste Paper began to process (bale) HDPE and PET plastic containers. An
estimated less than 10 percent by weight of recyclables processed are rejected and disposed.
Page 16
-------
Austin, Texas
ACCO Waste Paper sells glass cullet to Owens-Brockway in Waco, Texas. The firm sells ferrous
cans and metals to Commercial Metals in Austin, aluminum cans to Alcoa plants in Arkansas and
Tennessee, and HOPE and PET plastics to Orion Pacific in Midland, Texas for the manufacture of new
containers. ACCO Waste Paper's final market for newspapers is a deinking plant in Mexico City.
Corrugated cardboard is marketed in Mexico where it is manufactured into linerboard. High-grade and
mixed paper is sold to tissue mills in Fort Howard, Oklahoma or overseas through Houston or Mexico.
During the mid-1980's, approximately one-third of the newspaper collected by the City curbside
program was processed into a hydromulch product sprayed onto bare embankments to stabilize the soil.
In 1989 the manufacturer of this product accepted only a small amount of newspaper. The Humane
Society now collects newspaper for animal bedding.
Three full-time and two part-time employees at Ecology Action process approximately 11 tons per
day of recyclables in a 15,000-square-foot processing center opened in 1986. Earlier, materials had been
processed in one of the founder's backyard. The facility does not accept materials from private haulers.
The facility operates 250 days per year. Employees sort and crush glass, and separate and bale HOPE
and PET plastics, aluminum cans, and steel cans. In 1990 Ecology Action processed 2,301 tons; the
facility is designed to process 21 tons per day. In 1991 Ecology Action began accepting PVC plastic
containers at its drop-off sites. Ecology Action's warehouse was sold in October 1991, and it moved
operations to a 14,200-square-foot facility. The group purchased a portable granulator and plans to
begin chipping the plastics in late 1991. Ecology Action sells newspaper, high-grade and mixed paper,
corrugated cardboard, glass, and HDPE and PET plastics to ACCO Waste Paper. It sells aluminum cans
and ferrous cans to Commercial Metals in Austin; and PVC plastics are sold to Occidental Chemical in
Pennsylvania (which uses the materials to produce new bottles). Lead-acid batteries are sold to local
scrap yards.
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement
The City established a purchasing policy in October 1988 that created a 10 percent price preference
for the purchase of recycled products by City agencies. In 1990 the City Council passed a comprehensive
recycling resolution that redefined recycled paper as containing a minimum of 50 percent pre- or post-
consumer recycled fiber content
Composting Activities
Austin provides seasonal leaf collection, composts the leaves with wood chips (delivered by the
City's tree service contractor) and dewatered sludge at its wastewater treatment facility. In 1991
Austin distributed brochures on backyard composting and sponsored a "Master Composter" program
conducted by Austin Community Gardens. In January 1991, Austin initiated a "Don't Bag It" program
whereby residents were urged to leave grass clippings on their lawns. In the spring 120 volunteers were
selected as "Demonstration Lawns" for the program. Some of the volunteers received fertilizer, others
received " "Dillo Dirt" (finished compost), to apply on their lawns to hasten the composting process. In
June the City and Travis County Agricultural Extension Service conducted a public tour of four
demonstration lawns, including a demonstration of several brands of mulching lawnmowers.
In January 1991 the City Council solicited bids to purchase a brush shredder in order to divert wood
waste from the municipal landfill. The wood chips will be added to the compost process, or used as a
mulch, industrial fuel supplement, or cover for the landfill.
Page 17
-------
Austin, Tt
Curbside Collection
Start-up Date: 1988
Service Provider: City of Austin
Households Served: 110,000 (in single and duplex buildings in 1989); 111,500 in 1991
Mandatory: No
Materials Collected: Leaves
Set-out Method: Residents place leaves in either plastic or paper bags, which they
supply.
Collection Vehicles and Three-person City garbage crews collect leaves in 40 compactor trucks.
Method:
Collection Frequency: Weekly, from November to December and late February through early
April on one of the refuse collection days
Economic Incentives: None
Annual Tonnage 1372 tons from October 1988 through September 1989
Composting Site
Municipal crews bring leaves to the City's wastewater treatment facility at Hornsby Bend, 5 miles
from the City, where prison inmates remove plastic bags and extraneous materials. No tipping fee is
charged at the compost site. Small brush, dropped off at the site by City-contracted tree trimmers, is
also added to the compost mix. Employees combine leaves with dewatered sewage sludge, wood chips,
and water hyacinths with a front-end loader, and form the material into windrows. Before sludge is
incorporated into the windrows, it must be tested according to state and federal standards (EPA's
"Process to Significantly Reduce Pathogens [PSRP] and the Texas Department of Health's "Process to
Further Reduce Pathogens" [PFRP]). Operators maintain windrow temperatures at 55 degrees Celsius
for a minimum of 15 days in conformity with EPA guidelines. Compost has never failed EPA testing.
Internal windrow temperatures are measured daily. Samples are analyzed monthly for heavy metal
and three times per year for PCB content. The material is turned two times per week; it takes
approximately 1 month to compost and 1 to 2 months to cure. After the curing process, it is screened
through a 0.75-inch screen to yield a compost topsoil, or a 1-inch screen for a mulch product. Residue
that does not pass through the screens is reused as bulking agents. The City has not received any odor
complaints. Less than 2 percent by weight of compost collected is rejected and landfilled. The finished
product, marketed under the trade name "Dillo Dirt," is used by City departments and sold to
landscapers and local garden shops, which resell it to residents.
The City's annual Christmas tree mulching program uses private equipment and municipal labor.
Residents bring Christmas trees to one of thirteen drop-off sites during the two weekends following
Christmas. Local waste haulers provide roll-off containers to collect trees. Municipal crews shred trees
with chippers loaned by local landscaping companies and apply the mulch to City parks. Residents
who participate in this program receive a pine seedling.
Residents can also bring leaves and grass clippings year-round to a centrally located 6-acre compost
site operated by Austin Commur,-> Gardens, a private nonprofit horticultural organization. Residents
drop off materials free of charge, but landscapers are charged a $35 yearly fee. In 1989,50 landscapers
deposited approximately one-half of the materials composted at the site; residents dropped off the
rest. That year 5,628 tons of yard waste were composted. Employees place materials on three small
Page 18
-------
Austin, Texas
wir ,;T*S on a 30-by 100-yard strip and turn windrows with a front-end loader once every 2 months.
O .x st is ready after 1 year and is applied to the 23 public gardens operated by Austin Community
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
Commercial
Residential* Curbslde Self-Haul^ Total
Material (Tons, FY 1989) (Tons, FY 1989) (Tons, FY 1989) (Tons, FY 1989)
Newspaper* 7,235 65 500 7,800
Corrugated Cardboard 300 12,600 5,400 18,300
High-grade Paper 224 556 18,000 18,780
Other Paper 0 0 280 280
Glass 2,545 55 2,000 4,600
HOPE Plastic 0 0 200 200
Aluminum Cans 197 3 10,000 10,200
Ferrous Cans 376 24 NA 400
Scrap Metal 84 9 NA 93
Appliances/White Goods§ 603 0 5,000 5,603
Batteries 180 0 NA 180
Other" 1,643 0 0 1,643
Subtotal MSW Recycled 13,387 13,312 41,380 68,079
Leaves and Grass Clippingstt 4,186 0 0 4,186
Christmas Trees** NA NA NA NA
City Tree Trimmings - - 1,418 1,418
Landscapes' Waste - - 2,814 2,814
Subtotal MSW Composted 4,186 0 4,232 8,418
Total MSW Recovered 17,573 13,312 45,612 76,497
Notes: Tonnage data is for fiscal year 1989 (October 1988 through September 1989), with the exception of yard waste composted
at the Austin Community Gardens which is for 1989 (January through December).
50,000 tons of scrap metal were collected through private drop-offs. This tonnage is excluded from the above figures because it
consists mostly of industrial and auto scrap.
Austin also collected 3,360 tons of motor oil during its Home Chemical Collection Day in 1989. Because the oil is burned as a fuel
source, tonnages are not included.
•Residential tonnages were recovered through the municipal curbside programs (7,347 tons). Ecology Action drop-off centers
(1,785 tons, including 84 tons of scrap metal and 363 tons through the Landfill Diversion Center), 180 tons of batteries, 1,643 tons
of other privately collected terns including household items, 240 tons of small appliances, 2,192 tons recovered through other non-
profits, and composting operations (4,186 tons). These include municipal collection from one- to two-unit buildings and some three-
and four-unit buildings, 17 private (nonprofit) recycling drop-off centers used by apartment buildings, and the Austin Community
Gardens composting operation. Tonnages collected at nonprofit drop-off centers include a small amount of commercial materials.
'''Self-haul tonnages include recyclables brought to private (for-profit) buy-back sites and scrap yards, and yard waste brought to
the Austin Community Gardens, as well as brush collected through the City's tree trimming program. This includes material
generated from both the residential and commercial sectors.
*The tonnage of newspaper recycled from the residential sector includes cardboard, which residents commingle with newspaper for
municipal curbside collection.
^Includes 240 tons of small appliances and 363 tons of bulky items collected at the Landfill Diversion Center.
"Other includes dotNng (1,272 tons), household items (360 tons), and paint (11 tons).
ttlndudes yard waste collected through the municipal program (1,372 tons) and 50 percent of the material brought to Austin
Community Gardens' site (2,814 tons).
ttTonnage of Christmas trees recovered is not tracked and thus is not available.
Page 19
-------
Austin, Texas
Residential Materials Recovered through the Municipal Curbside Program
Material
Newspaper and Cardboard
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous Cans
Total Recycled
Number of Households Served
Participation Rate
Municipal
Curbside
Collection
(Tons, 1988-89)
5,589
1,551
58
149
7,347
110,000
40%
Municipal
Curbside
Collection
(Tons, 1989-90)
7,682
2,939
141
328
11,090
110,000
55%
Percent Change
37%
89%
143%
120%
51%
0%
38%
Publicity and Education
The City of Austin uses a variety of methods to advertise and promote municipal recycling
programs. In 1983 it sent a recruitment brochure to all city residents to publicize the block leader
program. Over 1,200 block leaders signed up to distribute fliers, brochures, and bumper stickers on local
recycling and composting activities to their neighbors. Block leaders also received a yard sign. The
block leaders are requested to commit 1 hour a month for the program and they may cover as large or
small an area as they wish.
In September 1988, Austin launched an annual "Recycling Week" to publicize changes in the
recycling program, including the addition of new materials. In 1989 the City asked private sponsors to
fund a "Cash for Trash" program during the "Recycling Week." Private sponsors awarded $100 each
day to randomly selected residents participating in the curbside program during the recycling week and
$100 per week during the remainder of the year. Also that year, the City hired a full-time employee
to operate a Recycling Hotline providing information on the City's programs. (The following year,
Austin switched to a recorded message for this service.) The Dry also publicizes the recycling program
through utility bill inserts, and announces program highlights on the radio and in the newspaper. In
1991 the City began to distribute recycling bins to all households served by curbside collection; 25XXX)
have been given out beginning with the neighborhoods with low participation rates. Private sponsors
fund $1.00 out of the $3.00 cost of the bins. Recycling brochures, written in English and Spanish, are
inserted in the bins. According to Laura Lancaster, the Recycling Public Relations Specialist, these bins
are excellent publicity; recycling rates have increased by as much as 300 percent in some neighborhoods
since their distribution.
Ecology Action publishes a quarterly newsletter. In 1991 the group published "The Austin
Environmental Handbook." The handbook is a guide for the environmental community featuring
information on organizations, City curbside and drop-off recycling programs, and activities for
environmentalists.
Page 20
-------
Austin, Texas
Economics
Costs Coven Capital costs cover the equipment used for the collection of 7347 tons of
recyclables and the collection and processing of 1,372 tons of leaves collected
through the municipal curbside program. Processing takes place in the private
sector; the Gty incurs no costs.
O&M costs cover (1) municipal collection and processing of 1,372 tons of organic
material and the collection of 7,347 tons of recyclables, (2) the City's contract
with Ecology Action to recover bulky items (363 tons) at the Landfill Diversion
Center, and (3) the City's administrative and educational costs for municipal
recycling and composting programs.
Capital Costs; Collection
Item
11 Stake-bed Trucks @ $20,135
Pick-up Truck
1 1 Eager Beaver Trailers @ $14,433
Crane Carrier Truck
6,000 Recycling Buckets @ $1
Kann Truck
Eager Beaver Truck
20,000 Recycling Bins @ $3.00
40 Compactor Trucks @ approximately
Cost
$221,484
9,930
158,765
61,000
6,000
53,000
38,000
60,000
NA
Use
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Composting
Year Incurred
1986
1986
1987
1989
1989
1990
1990
1991
NA
$55,000 each*
Note: All equipment has been paid in full at the time of purchase except for the Eager Beaver trucks and trailers which were paid off
with a 5-year loan at an interest rate of 10.67 percent.
'The City uses 1 to 40 compactor trucks in a given week. Each truck may spend up to one-half of its route time in leaf collection
while the program is in effect
Capital Costs: Processing
Item
Brown Bear Windrow Turner
Front-end Loader
Conveyor and Screens
Cost
$120,000
80,000
60,000
Use
Composting
Composting
Composting
Year Incurred
1986
1986
1988
Note: All equipment was paid in full at the time of purchase.
Page 21
-------
Austin, Texts
Annual and Per Ton Operating and Maintenance Costs (FY1989)
Cost Tons Covered Per Ton Cost
Recycling Subtotal* $830,700 7,710 $108
Collection $735,000 7,710 $95
Cufbside 722.000 7,347 98
Drop-Off at Landfill 13,000 363 36
Processing v^-: '"' 0 7,710 0
Administration 65,300 7.710 8
Education/Publicity 30.400 7,710 4
Composting Subtotal $105,000 1,372 $77
Collection $5.000 1.372 $4
Processing 80,000 1,372 58
Administration 10,000 1,372 7
Education/Publicity 10,000 1,372 7
Recycling & Composting Total $935,700 9,082 $103
Collection $740,000 9,082 $81
Processing 80,000 9,082 9
Administration 75,300 9,082 8
Education/Publicity 40,400 9,082 4
Note: numbers may not add up to total due to rounding.
*ln addition to these costs, the City paid $9,600 in capital debt expense in FY 1989.
The Solid Waste Services Enterprise Fund received $220,000 from ACCO
Waste Paper for the sale of recyclables. The Wastewater Treatment
Department received $12,000 from sale of compost products.
Recycling and composting programs are funded through City utility fees
and capital bonds.
The City of Austin employs 34 people: 1 for recycling administration, 28
for recycling collection, 1 for composting administration, and 4 for
processing yard waste. ACCO Waste Paper employs 22 people: 2
administrators and 20 developmentally disabled workers. Nine
employees work at Ecology Action. Austin Community Gardens employs
two people.
Part-time Employees: Up to 120 employees collect leaves two times per year.
Materials Revenues:
Source of Funding:
Full-time Employees:
Page 22
-------
Austin, Texas
Future Solid Waste Management Plans
As recommended in the City's 1990 Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP), Austin will change its
refuse, recydables, and yard waste program in 1992. Each week City crews will collect refuse on one
day, recydables on another, and yard waste, year-round, on Monday in place of biweekly refuse
collection. The City will also collect bulky items and brush on a quarterly basis. Additional
recommendations from the SWMP include an expansion of the compost operation to accommodate year-
round yard waste collection, a brush-shredding operation, and construction of two transfer stations with
recycling capabilities. The City plans to implement volume-based refuse rates and semi-automated
collection of refuse. Residents will have a choice of trash can or cart sizes: 30, 60, or 90 gallons.
Monthly garbage disposal fees will vary according to size and number of containers chosen. In addition,
for extra waste, residents will have to purchase tags in packages of five for $10. This fee system
provides an economic incentive for waste reduction, source separation, and participation in the recycling
program. In a 1-year pilot program, which began in June 1991, residents pay from $6 per month for 30
gallons of trash to $12 a month for 90 gallons. The pilot program will help establish the rates
necessary to provide adequate revenues for citywide implementation. The City expects the conversion
to the semi-automated fleet to enhance worker safety and provide flexibility for pick-up of
standardized containers, yard waste, and any excess refuse in labelled bags.
Recycling opportunities are limited outside the City. Private haulers serve some outlying
communities with curbside pick-up of separated recydables. Ecology Action plans to open up several
drop-off centers in rural areas. The group plans to initiate one pilot freon recycling project at the
Landfill Diversion Center to recover freon from refrigeration units, and to open other freon collection
centers. Ecology Action is currently developing programs to begin motor oil container, aseptic
packaging, and polystyrene recycling in the City. It is also working on developing an alternate use of
newspaper to help overcome the severely depressed market
In June 1991, Austin Community Gardens began a master composting project; the project has three
phases. First, they are training 25 master composters and supplying them with composting bins.
Second, Austin Community Gardens will provide residents with bins at cost, and will train landscapers
to educate home gardeners on backyard composting. In the final phase, a large-scale compost site will
be constructed and operated by Austin Community Gardens as a demonstration site for backyard
composting.
Contacts
Alan Watts JimDoersam Kimberly Thompson
Manager Composting Manager Conservation Representative
Waste Reduction Programs Austin Wastewater Treatment Environmental and
Environmental and Facility Conservation Services Dept.
Conservation Services Dept. 2210 S FM 973 City of Austin
City of Austin Austin, TX 78725 Solid Waste Services
Solid Waste Services Phone (512) 929-1001 P.O. Box 1088
P.O. Box 1088 Austin, TX 78767
Austin, TX 78767 Phone (512) 472-0500
Phone (512) 472-0500
Fax (512) 482-0696
Page 23
-------
Austin, Texas
Barbara Nagel
Director
Austin Community Gardens
4814 Sunshine Drive
Austin, TX 78756
Phone (512) 458-2009
Gail Vittori
Chairperson
Austin Solid Waste Advisory
Commission
C/O Center for Maximum
Potential Building Systems
8604 F.M.969
Austin, TX 78724
Phone (512) 928-4786
J.D. Porter and Peter Altaian
Ecology Action
210 Industrial Blvd. # B
Austin, TX 78745
Phone (512) 326-8899
David Anderson
President
ACCO Waste Paper
P.O. Box 6429
Austin, TX 78762
Phone (512) 385-7600
References
Abramowitz, Richard. "Source Separation in Austin," Biocycle. (September 1987): p. 36-37.
Bernard, Ken. (Longhorn Disposal, Austin, TX). Personal communication, May 1991.
Clemment, Jack. (BFI, Austin, TX). Personal communication, May 1991.
Doersam, Jim. "Austin Benefits From Sludge Composting Program," Biocycle. (November/December
1988): pp. 40-41.
Eilers, Bo. (Central Texas Refuse, Austin, TX). Personal communication, May 1991.
Eppler, Glendon. (Texas Department of Health, Austin, TX). Personal communication, May 1991.
Garza, Eliseo. (Department of Solid Waste Services, Austin, TX). Personal communication, May 1991.
Hobbs, Dennis. (Texas Disposal Systems). Personal communication, April 1991.
Lancaster, Laura. (Public Relations Specialist, ECSD, Austin, TX). Personal communication, May 1991.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Recycling Works: State and Local Solutions to Solid Waste
Management Problems, January 1989.
Watts, Alan. Profile: Recycling and Waste Reduction Programs in Austin, Texas. 1989.
Page 24
-------
Berkeley, California
Berkeley,
California
Demographics
Jurisdiction:
Population:
Area:
Total Households:
Total Businesses:
Brief Description:
City of Berkeley
102,724 in 1990
18 square miles
43334 (20,128 single-family homes, 17,945 households in buildings with 2
to 19 units, 4,881 households in buildings with 20 and more units, 14 trailer
homes, and 566 other residences)
3,318 businesses
Berkeley is a residential community in Alameda County across the Bay
from the larger metropolitan area of San Francisco. One-third of
Berkeley's business/institutional sector consists of government offices and
institutions, such as the University of California, federal research
laboratories, and the State Department of Health. There is little vacant
land in the City, and Berkeley has experienced minimal growth and
development in the last few years. Per capita income in 1990 was $16,522;
mean household income in 1990 was $34,200.
Page 25
-------
Berkeley, California
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
AnnualTonnages (July 1990 to June 199D
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
Disposed
Incinerated
Landfilled
Generated*
Residential
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
Commercial/
Institutional
NA
NA
. NA
NA
0
NA
NA
Total
MSW*
23,366
20,366
3.000
80,609
140
80,469
103,974
Construction
& Demolltlont
39,593
39,593
0
20,033
0
20,033
59,626
Total
Waste
62,959
59,959
3,000
100,642
140
100,502
163,600
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
Percent by Weight Recovered
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
22%
20%
3%
66%
66%
0%
38%
37%
2%
Mole: Due to rounding, numbers may not appear to add to totals.
'Berkeley does not separately hack residential and commercial waste recovered and disposed.
t29,000 tons of recovered construction debris were estimated from the first 6 months of 1991 data.
^Municipal waste generated is based on 1988-89 annual data estimated from quarterly waste composition samplings. This is the
best source of data available. Because no major demographic or economic changes occurred in Berkeley between 1989 and 1990.
the City believes there has been no significant change in waste generation rates. Recovered tonnages are based on actual
weighed amounts.
Transfer Station
Tipping Fee:
Refuse Collection and
Disposal:
$48 per ton at Berkeley's transfer station in fiscal year 1991. In fiscal
year 1992, the tipping fee at the transfer station rose to $52 per ton.
The City of Berkeley has a monopoly on the collection of putrescible
refuse from the residential and commercial/institutional sectors.1 The
City's Refuse Division collects all mixed refuse from the residential
sector including the dormitories at the University of California. It also
collects all putrescible refuse from the commercial sector, except from
certain University buildings, as well as dry commercial waste from some
businesses. Two private haulers, Richmond Sanitary Service and
Oakland Scavenger, collect the remaining commercial and institutional
refuse, including construction and demolition debris.
Page 26
-------
Berkeley, California
Total Waste Recovered and Disposed (Percent by Weight, FY1991)
Disposed 62% Recovered 38%
C&D Disposed 12%
•
C&D Recycled 24%
MSW Disposed 49%
\\^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^'Sf^llsmraL \.^S2S8S2SvSS"8Sv3SMrj
MSW Recycled 12%
r MSW Composted 2%
^ ^-^i*******" i
Note: Due to rounding, percentages do not add to 100%.
Refuse Collection and There are two transfer stations in Alameda County, one in Berkeley and
Disposal (cont'd): one in San Leandro. None of the County's three privately owned landfills
is located in Berkeley. Berkeley's own landfill closed in 1983.
Municipally collected refuse is taken to the City of Berkeley's Transfer
Station, where it is hauled to the Vasco Road Landfill (owned and
operated by Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc.) located 42 miles away.
Some residents self-haul refuse such as yard debris directly to the
transfer station. Waste collected by Oakland Scavenger and the
University of California is taken to the Davis Street Transfer Station in
Alameda County and then hauled to the Altamont Landfill (owned by
Oakland Scavenger, a subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc.), in eastern
Alameda County. Richmond Sanitary hauls the waste it collects to the
West Contra Costa County Landfill.
In FY 1991 collection and disposal of refuse cost the City $9.6 million for
83,000 tons of refuse. This is equivalent to $116 per ton including tipping
fees. Since 1984 Berkeley has charged households a variable rate for
refuse collection. In fiscal year 1990 the rates were $4.60 per month for a
13-gallon container, $12 for a 32-gallon container, $24 for a 64-gallon
container, and $36 for a 96-gallon container. In 1991, 200 residents are
using a mini-can (13-gallon can).
Page 27
-------
Berkeley, California.
Materials Recovery Overview
Goals and Legislative The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 requires all
Requirements: California jurisdictions to divert at least 25 percent of the waste stream
from disposal by 1995, and at least 50 percent by 2000, through source
reduction, recycling, and composting. The Alameda County Source
Reduction and Recycling Act of 1990 states that incineration cannot be
counted toward this waste diversion goal. However in September 1991,
this law was overruled by the Courts. Berkeley's own law (passed in
1982) does not allow incineration to be counted towards recycling goals.
The State of California implemented deposit-container legislation in
1986.
The City of Berkeley has led the nation in municipal waste recycling and reduction, ever since the
Ecology Center (EC), a community-based environmental organization, opened a recycling center in 1970.
In 1973 the Ecology Center began monthly curbside collection of newspaper. Also that year, workers at
the recycling center formed a separate organization called the Community Conservation Centers, Inc.
(CCC), which subsequently opened two additional recycling drop-off centers in the City. The Ecology
Center opened ENCORE!, a wine bottle reuse facility in 1975. In 1978 the Ecology Center began monthly
curbside collection of source-separated metal cans and glass bottles, in addition to newspaper, from
Berkeley households.
Berkeley's community organizations and residents have been a driving force behind the City's
comprehensive recycling programs. In January 1982, the City Council adopted a recycling policy
statement that established a goal of recycling 50 percent of the City's municipal solid waste, the
nation's most ambitious recycling/waste reduction goal at the time. The same year Berkeley voters
passed Measure U, which put in place a 5-year moratorium (which was subsequently renewed by the
City Council) on garbage incinerators and directed the City to concentrate on recycling instead of
incineration as its waste management strategy. By the time the Berkeley landfill closed in 1983, the
City had completed construction of a Solid Waste Management Center on City-owned land. This
complex included the new Berkeley transfer station, the Ecology Center's headquarters and materials
processing center, a buy-back/drop-off site operated by CCC, and Urban Ore's salvage/reuse operation.
In late 1982, at the request of the City, the three community-based organizations—the Ecology Center
(a nonprofit organization), the CCC (a nonprofit organization), and Urban Ore (a for-profit business)—
formed an alliance called the "Berkeley Recycling Group," to coordinate all the City's materials
recovery operations on the new site. However, in 1983 two other businesses received the contract for
these services; legal and political battles ensued, and one year later Berkeley residents passed the
Recycling Policy Ordinance, which led to the return of the community groups. Also in 1984, a citizen
initiative requiring the City of Berkeley to meet a 50 percent recycling goal was passed by Berkeley
voters. In 1986, due to the City's inability to continue to provide a site for the operation, Urban Ore's
composting operation was dosed. Recycled Wood Products opened a composting operation in Berkeley
in 1989.
During the 1970's and early 1980's, the Citv provided minimal financial or in-kind assistance, such
as the use of City-owned property to EC's curbside collection program and CCC's drop-off programs. In
1985 the City began to formally contract ECs and CCCs drop-off recycling services. The contract fees
paid to these organizations covered the difference between the programs' cost and revenues earned from
the sale of recyclable materials. Under its contract with EC, the City pays a fee, or waste diversion
credit, for every ton of material collected. The credit is based on a slidim scale tied to the door price of
newspaper. The City purchased most of the capital equipment for i . s collection and processing
program, including collection trucks and curbside recycling containers. The City has paid CCC
approximately $25,000 per year to operate the Buy Back. Since 1983 Urban Ore's license agreement
Page 28
-------
Berkeley, California
requires it to pay the City 10 percent of its monthly gross revenues, totalling up to $2,900 per month (in
June 1991). In fiscal year 1991 Urban Ore paid the City a total of $30,000.
During 1988 and 1989, the Ecology Center expanded its curbside service from monthly to weekly
collection of recydables. From July 1990 to June 1991, 5,984 tons of recyclables were collected through
the residential curbside program, nearly 200 percent more than 2 years earlier. In March 1988, the
City's Refuse Division began a pilot commercial recycling program, collecting separated glass,
aluminum, tin, and mixed paper from businesses and a few apartment buildings. By 1991,290 businesses
citywide (8 percent of businesses) and all municipal offices were receiving municipal collection of tin,
aluminum, glass, corrugated cardboard, newspaper, and white office paper. In 1989 residents voted
Berkeley's curbside recycling programs the "Best Loved City Service."
California has targeted an 80 percent recovery goal for beverage containers. The State's deposit
container program is funded through fees paid by beverage distributors for each container sold in the
State. Originally set at 1 cent, these deposit payments paid by consumers to retailers were increased,
effective January 1990, to 2 cents per small container, and 4 cents for larger containers. Revenues from
the Beverage Container Recycling Fund are used to pay the return value of 2.5 cents for each empty
container, and 5 cents for each container greater than 24 ounces. Deposit containers are recovered both
through the curbside and drop-off programs as well as supermarkets and liquor stores. Of the 3,629 tons
of deposit glass containers estimated to have been generated in Berkeley in FY 1991, 2,874 tons, or 80
percent, were recovered and recycled. A total of 1,550 tons of deposit glass (54 percent) were recovered
through the residential curbside program, 240 tons (8 percent) through drop-off, 712 tons (25 percent)
through buy-back, 192 tons (7 percent) through the University and 99 tons (3 percent) were recovered
outside of the City. Of the estimated 452 tons of aluminum cans generated, 318 tons, or 70 percent, were
collected and recycled. The City believes that deposit legislation has increased the scavenging of
materials from the curbside program.
Berkeley considers source reduction its primary waste management strategy (See Source Reduction
Initiatives section). In its 1991 Source Reduction and Recycling Element (its new recycling plan),
Berkeley set a source reduction goal of 8.4 percent of the waste stream by 1995 and 135 percent by 2000,
to be accomplished through such activities as replacement of nonreusable materials in commercial
enterprises, residential use of cloth diapers and other reusable products, junk mail reduction, home
composting, and Urban Ore's salvage and reuse program. Berkeley has tried to discourage use of
materials not easily recyclable, or are otherwise harmful to the environment. In 1988 the Berkeley
City Council approved an ordinance prohibiting the use of fast food and take-out packaging made with
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). In 1989 this ordinance was extended to ban all foamed polystyrene take-
out food and beverage containers, whether or not they contain CFCs. This law further requires that
food merchants ensure that at least 50 percent of their take-out food packaging be degradable or
recyclable as defined by law. Berkeley has pioneered a citywide "precycling" campaign, encouraging
residents to buy and use fewer disposable and nonrecyclable materials. The City has chosen to exclude
plastics from the materials collected through its curbside collection program and drop-off sites, focusing
instead on discouraging their use.
Recycling Activities
Residential Curbside Recycling
Start-up Date: 1973 for newspaper only; 1978 for other materials
Service Provider: The Ecology Center, Inc., under contract with the City
Pick-up Frequency: Weekly
Page 29
-------
Berkeley, California
Same Day as Refuse
Households Served:
Mandatory:
Participation Rate:
Materials Collected:
Set-out Method:
Collection Method and
Vehicles:
Economic Incentives:
Enforcement:
Annual Tonnages:
Yes
An estimated 40,000 households, primarily in buildings with fewer than
12 units. EC collects recyclables from a few buildings with 12 or more
units if recyclables are properly set out at curbside.
No
55 percent for 30,000 stops (ILSR calculation based on ECs observed
weekly set-out rate of 25 percent multiplied by a participation/set-out
ratio of 22).2
Newspaper, aluminum cans, glass containers, tin cans, and refillable wine
bottles. Mixed paper and magazines are collected in three neighborhoods
(approximately 2,000 households) in the City.
Materials are segregated into three categories. Newspaper is tied or
placed in bags, mixed metal cans are placed in waxed cardboard boxes
provided by the City, and glass is placed in a second waxed cardboard
box. In the mixed waste paper pilot recycling districts, mixed paper is
placed in paper bags or bundled with twine.
Recyclables are collected in one of five Lodal compartmentalized
vehicles. One or two crew members (including the driver) place
segregated recyclables into three different compartments. One for glass, a
second for newspaper, and a third for metal. Mixed paper is placed in a
fourth compartment (in the pilot mixed paper recycling districts), and the
remaining compartment is used for overflow material. Two crew members
ride on vehicles on hilly routes; 33 percent of routes are serviced by two
crew members, 67 percent by one.
The variable can-rate encourages residents to generate less waste, thus
proving an economic incentive to recycle.
The City has an anti-scavenging ordinance and violators can be fined $100
or more (for repeat offenders). The City has issued a few citations for
scavenging of recyclable materials, but has undertaken no coordinated
anti-scavenging effort. The State Integrated Solid Waste Management
Act makes scavenging of recyclables a misdemeanor punishable by a fine
of $500 or 6 months' imprisonment. In 1991 the State law was amended to
provide for fines of $1,000 and one year in prison. No one has yet been
convicted under State law. By comparing actual recovery rates to
expected rates, the Ecology Center estimates that it loses approximately
$10,000 per month in revenue due to scavenging of aluminum and glass.3
5,984 tons in fiscal year 1991
Multi-unit Collection
In 1988 the City's Refuse Division began to service approximately 15 multi-unit buildings (with 12
or more households) through its commercial curbside program, collecting source-separated glass bottles,
aluminum and tin cans, white office paper, and newspaper on a weekly basis in semi-automated
recycling trucks. (See Commercial Recycling section for more information.) Participating buildings,
which include co-ops and senior citizen apartment buildings, where tenants are especially interested in
recycling, receive both refuse and recyclable pick-up from the City. Recycling service is provided free
of charge to these buildings. The City intends to expand this program in 1992 and increase publicity.
Page 30
-------
Berkeley, California
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley
Recycling
Legislative All retail food vendors are required by the 1989 Ordinance Prohibiting
Requirements: Take-out and Fast Food Packaging Manufactured to provide recycling
containers for glass and cans for customers' use.
Service Provider. City of Berkeley's Refuse Division
Number Served: 250
Type Served: Bars, restaurants, schools, and offices
Materials Collected: Class and metal beverage containers, high-grade paper, newspaper, and
corrugated cardboard are collected from businesses. White office paper is
collected from schools.
Pick-up Frequency: Weekly
Set-out and Collection The City collects recyclables in a front-loading 44-cubic-yard,
Method: compartmentalized recycling vehicle custom built by T. J. Garge. The
truck features a crane that automatically empties recycling containers
into truck compartments.
Incentives: Businesses serviced by municipal refuse collection can save money through
recycling by reducing the size of their refuse containers.
Annual Tonnages 990 tons in fiscal year 1991 including a small amount of material from
apartment buildings
The City Refuse Division began a pilot commercial recycling program in March 1988 in one business
district. The businesses were not charged extra for curbside recycling service and the cost was covered by
businesses' refuse collection payments. City refuse crews collected glass, aluminum, tin, and mixed
paper using a pick-up truck and a compartmentalized trailer. The mixed paper was found to be
contaminated with glossy paper and foil, and the City had difficulty finding markets for this
material. In September 1988, the program, limited to the collection of glass, expanded citywide. In
January 1989, with a grant from the County, the City purchased one 44-cubic-yard compartmentalized,
custom-built recycling vehicle and began collecting tin, aluminum, glass, corrugated cardboard,
newspaper, and white office paper. However, this front-loading vehicle caused significant glass
breakage; an estimated 40 percent of glass collected was broken. By 1991, 250 businesses were served
with municipal curbside collection, and all City schools were served with collection of white paper.
The City hopes to expand this service, collecting at least 4,490 tons per year by 1995.
The Associated Students of the University of California Recycling Project collects source-separated
recyclable materials from University of California at Berkeley facilities. These materials include
glass bottles, aluminum cans, computer tab cards and paper, white and colored ledger paper, and mixed
paper. Materials collected through this program were delivered by the students to the Berkeley Buy
Back, run by the CCC, for processing. An estimated 318 tons of recyclables were collected through this
program between September 1988 and August 1989. Between July 1990 and June 1991, 900 tons of
recyclables were collected at UC Berkeley, an increase of nearly 200 percent.
Some additional private haulers, such as Richmond Sanitary, offer curbside collection of
recyclables to their refuse customers. Some retail operations self-haul recyclable materials to the
Berkeley Buy-Back; others set all recyclables at curbside, and independent individuals collect
materials and bring them to the Berkeley Buy-Back or to buy-backs outside the City.
Page 31
-------
Berkeley, California
Drop-off Centers
Number and Type
Public or Private:
Sectors Served:
Materials Accepted:
Annual Tonnage
Six centers. The Community Conservation Centers, Inc. (a nonprofit
company) operates two drop-off sites and the Berkeley Buy Back center.
Urban Ore, Inc. (a for-profit company) runs a salvage/reuse drop-off
operation, at two sites. American Rock & Asphalt, in Richmond,
California, and Gallagher & Burke in Oakland, operate concrete recovery
operations. ._.
All drop-off sites are privately operated. The City contracts with CCC
-to operate the Berkeley Buy Back.
Berkeley residents and businesses. American Rock & Asphalt, and
Gallagher & Burke Construction, also accept construction and demolition
debris from private contractors outside of the City.
CCC accepts newspaper, mixed paper (such as magazines), glass
containers, aluminum and tin cans, refillable wine bottles, and corrugated
cardboard, from 9 am to 4 pm, 6 days a week. The Berkeley Buy Back
purchases newspaper, cardboard, high-grade paper, mixed paper,
aluminum and tin cans, ferrous metal scrap, and refillable wine bottles on
a per pound basis. Urban Ore accepts construction and demolition
materials such as doors, furniture, plumbing fixtures, windows, and other
salvaged items. American Rock & Asphalt and Gallagher & Burke
accept broken concrete and asphalt
A total of 45,597 tons of Berkeley-generated recyclables from municipal
waste and construction and demolition debris were recovered through
Berkeley's drop-off centers in fiscal year 1991. This tonnage consisted of
5,390 tons of materials recovered at Urban One (a small amount of this
was recovered at other salvage operations), 2,386 tons recovered at the
Berkeley Buy Back, 1,821 tons at CCCs drop-off centers, 28,900 tons at
American Rock & Asphalt, and 7,100 tons at Gallagher & Burke.
Since January 1990, the City Council has required the Public Works Department to install recycling
containers for the collection of newspaper, glass, and metal cans in City parks and newspaper bins on
major commercial streets. Much of this material is scavenged. In the future the City will attempt to
track tonnages recovered through these drop bins.
Salvage/Reuse
Urban Ore is a model for-profit materials salvage business founded in Berkeley in 1980. The
company receives and salvages materials, such as construction debris and used household items, which
would otherwise end up in the landfill. Initially, Urban Ore retrieved the materials it sold, such as
metal scrap, from the Berkeley dump. Today, only about 10 percent of the materials sold at Urban Ore
are salvaged from the Berkeley transfer station. The bulk of materials are dropped off by residents and
local businesses, and in many instances, Urban Ore pays for the material it receives. In 1991 Urban Ore
began to offer Limited pick-up service.
Urban Ore operates two separate sites. The Building Materials Exchange sells salvaged
construction items, such as doors, windows, bathtubs, and sinks. The Discard Management Center,
located on 1 2/3 acres of City-owned land sells furniture, clothing, kitchen appliances, and other
Page 32
-------
Berkeley, California
household items. In October 1991, Urban Ore reconfigured its operations; it now operates one large
retail sales area composed of two parts, the Building Materials Exchange and the General Store. The
Discard Management Center has a receiving dock and processing rooms that occupy 12,000 square feet of
a City building and lot next to the transfer station. The retail sales area, four blocks away, occupies 2.2
acres of commercial land consisting of a large open yard for the Building Materials Exchange and 17,300
square feet of warehouse space for the General Store, which handles cabinets, hardware, furniture,
clothing, electronics, household goods, and commercial equipment. Urban Ore has offices in the General
Store, including its new Information Services Division. The Company employs 16 people.
In 1990 Urban Ore recovered an estimated 1,123 tons of household goods and an estimated 4,267 tons
of building materials for a total of 5390 tons. Based on gross income, Urban Ore estimates that it has
tripled the volume of material it handles since moving off the landfill site in mid-1983. The company
grossed over $600,000 in 1989 and $729,996 in 1990; an additional $5,629 was earned in consulting fees.
Urban Ore's 1990 operating and maintenance costs totaled $702,242 ($135 per ton). Of this, $95,000 was
paid to residents and businesses for reusable goods (most of it went to local residents) and $282,351 was
spent on personnel. In 1990 Urban Ore earned $27,754 in profits (equivalent to approximately $5/ton).
Its inventory is assessed at $22,000. Dan Knapp, Urban Ore's founder, estimates that the company's
1991 revenue may reach $900,000. In an average week in 1989, Urban Ore received most of its revenue
from the sale of furniture, building materials, hardware, and commercial and office goods.
Urban Ore prefers to sell the materials it receives to residents or businesses for reuse. Materials
that cannot be sold are recycled at any one of a number of local recycling and composting operations. For
example, unpainted wood is taken to Recycled Wood Products.
Construction and Demolition Debris Recovery
Many private builders and contractors in Berkeley bring broken concrete and asphalt from
construction and demolition projects to American Rock & Asphalt's two recovery facilities, located in
Richmond and South San Francisco, or to Gallagher & Burke located in Oakland. Based on the first
half of the year, American Rock & Asphalt estimates that it recovered 500,000 tons of material from
Berkeley and other surrounding areas in FY 1991. (In 1989 it recovered about one-half this amount, or
250,000 tons of material.) Berkeley contractors brought an estimated 28,000 tons to the Richmond
facility and 900 tons to the San Francisco facility in 1990-91. American Rock & Asphalt's primary
recovery site is located on a quarry in Richmond, which exhausted its supply of virgin rock 3 to 4 years
ago. The company retrofitted this facility to process recovered concrete and asphalt at a cost estimated
at less than $50,000. Individual contractors and businesses are charged a tipping fee of $20 to $50 per
semi-load or 20 cubic yards (equivalent to 30 tons4) of broken concrete and asphalt. The tipping fee may
be waived if a contractor agrees to buy American Rock & Asphalt's replacement materials.
Broken concrete, asphalt, and brick are sent down a conveyor, where laborers pull out wood and
debris by hand. Steel is removed by magnets; materials are crushed and screened; water is added at
different points in the process to dampen material. The end product, made from 100 percent recycled
materials, is an aggregate road base, suitable as a preparatory material for roads under a final
application of asphalt. It sells for approximately $6.50 per ton. Contractors purchase it directly from
the facility. American Rock & Asphalt claims that it routinely sends samples to a commercial
laboratory for specification compliance testing.5
Urban Ore, a Berkeley-based company, salvages used building materials, such as windows,
bathtubs, and furniture, at its Building Materials Exchange. Berkeley homeowners and builders
purchase salvaged good for reuse. (See above.) In FY 1991, it salvaged 4,267 tons of Berkeley building
materials, of which 3,593 tons are considered construction and demolition debris. Six-hundred and
seventy-four tons of white goods, included in municipal solid waste tonnage recovered, were also
salvaged at the Building Materials Exchange.
Page 33
-------
Berkeley, California
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables
Recyclable materials collected at curbside are taken to the Solid Waste Management Center
(SWMC), which is owned by the City. The facility, constructed in 1982 on 7 acres of City-owned land,
contains the transfer station, the Berkeley Buy Back, CCC's drop-off center, the curbside residential
program operated by the Ecology Center, and one of Urban Ore's operations. The Buy Back and curbside
operations have a combined design capacity of 1,500 tons per month. The throughput is currently 1,000
tons per month. Most of the equipment used to process materials is owned by the City.
The Ecology Center operates the portion of the Solid Waste Management Center that processes
materials collected at curbside. A three-person crew including one forklift operator unloads material.
Each compartment is removed from the recycling trucks with a rotating forklift, and materials are
dumped on the ground. Minimal equipment is used to process recydables. Cans are magnetically sorted
on a small conveyor belt. Contaminants and aluminum foil are removed by hand. Tin cans are baled on
site and sold to Proler for use in the precipitation of copper. Aluminum is sold to the Berkeley Buy Back
center. Glass is hand-sorted on a second conveyor belt from which workers remove refiilable glass
bottles for sale to ENCOREI's bottle facility. The remaining glass is crushed and sold as three-mix
(three-colored mixed cutlet) to California CRInc in Oakland. Newspaper is placed in 40-foot Sea-Land
containers and sold to a local broker. Mixed paper is given to CCC for baling and marketing. The
Ecology Center employs a total of 14 people, including site crew and drivers. Less than 1 percent of
material collected through EC's curbside program is disposed as residue. Haulers will reject
contaminants and nonrecydables at curbside. The Ecology Center has consistently enjoyed a reputation
among materials brokers as delivering very clean material.
CCC independently markets materials collected through its drop-off programs, selling to many of
the same companies as EC. CCC uses a horizontal baler, several forklifts, and an aluminum separator
to process materials. The City has installed expanded processing facilities in the Buy Back's section of
the site, including a 40-foot conveyor belt system (at a cost of $110,000) for cleaning and sorting
recyclable materials. The City hopes to make this increased processing capacity accessible to other
Berkeley recyclers.
Founded in 1975, ENCORE! washes up to 60,000 cases of wine bottles per month, of which 45,000
cases were post-consumer material. The group accepts most bottle types used by American producers.
ENCORE! pays local collection groups, wineries, and glass manufacturers up to $130 a ton for bottles,
washes them, and sells the bottles back to the wineries for reuse. ENCORE! has steadily increased its
profits each of its 15 years. Unfortunately, 1989 and 1990 were hard on the company, and its production,
employment, and profits declined by 50 percent during that period. In 1991 ENCORE! processed only
30,000 cases of bottles per month, of which 5,000 cases were post-consumer material. Peter Heylin, co-
founder of ENCORE!, attributes this sudden decrease to competition with the State deposit legislation.
According to Heylin, in 1989 California unofficially began to accept previously excluded wine bottles
with other beverage glass for redemption.
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement
The Alameda County Source Reduction and Recycling Act of 1990 requires counties to establish and
fund programs to stimulate markets for recycled materials. The City of Berkeley has instituted a
recycled product purchasing preference program.
Page 34
-------
Berkeley, California
Composting Activities
Urban Ore began composting Berkeley's yard debris and wood waste, under contract with the City,
at the old landfill site in 1982. In 1985 Urban Ore composted 56,956 cubic yards of material.* The
composting operation was terminated in 1986. In September 1989, Recycled Wood Products opened a
composting site, and the City instituted a pilot yard waste collection program. Berkeley's Refuse
Division began serving 2,600 households (10 percent of the City) with curbside collection of yard waste.
All municipally collected yard waste, as well as privately dropped-off landscapes' waste, is brought
to Recycled Wood Products composting site in Berkeley.
Backyard Composting
An undetermined number of Berkeley residents currently compost yard waste and sometimes food
waste at home. In September 1990, the Alameda County Waste Management Authority approved
funding for a countywide home-composting education program. This program will include the
development of demonstration gardens, a hotline, and workshops. In conjunction with this program,
Berkeley is in the process of distributing 1,000 backyard composting bins to households. While the cost
of these bins is subsidized in part by the City, residents must also pay $33 for each Biostack composter
(manufactured by Smith and Hawkin).
Curbside Collection
Start-up Date: September 1989
Service Provider: Berkeley's Solid Waste Management Division
Households Served: 2,600
Materials Collected: Leaves, grass clippings, brush, and Christmas trees
Mandatory: No
Set-out Method: Yard materials are placed in 32-gallon bags or 64-gallon wheeled carts
supplied by by the City. (The City will not distribute bins free of charge
once the program goes citywide).
Collection Vehicles and One rear-loading packer truck staffed with one crew member is used to
Method: collect yard waste.
Collection Frequency: Every other week
Economic Incentives: Berkeley's variable can rate serves as an incentive to set out yard waste
for composting rather than as refuse.
The Solid Waste Management Refuse Division of the City of Berkeley collected an estimated 1,500
tons of yard waste in fiscal year 1991 for composting at Recycled Wood Products. Landscapers dropped
off an additional 1,500 tons of waste (estimated). The University of California chips tree trimmings
and mixes them with lawn clippings. Some of this material is hauled to Recycled Wood Products, the
rest is used as mulch on campus grounds. Tonnages for waste collected from the University of California
are not tracked, but are included in the 1,500 tons per year dropped off by landscapers.
Page 35
-------
Berkeley, California
Composting Site
All yard waste collected through the municipal composting program is brought to Recycled Wood
Products' facility located near the Berkeley transfer station, on land leased from the University of
California, Berkeley. This operation is one of five nationwide owned by Recycled Wood Products.
Located on 4 1/2 acres of land, the facility employs seven individuals and utilizes $700,000 worth of
equipment to process about 50 tons per day of yard and wood waste—13,000 tons per year. Of the 3,000
tons of Berkeley-generated material processed at this site, 1,500 tons are dropped off by private
landscapes and 1,500 tons are collected through the municipal program. According to Recycled Wood
ProductSylthe tonnage of material brought to the facility by Berkeley landscapers and the Solid Waste
Management Division has increased considerably in the last few months, from about 10 to 15 tons per
day in 1989, to 20 tons per day in 1990. About 80 percent of the 3,000 tons of Berkeley material
composted in 1990-91 consisted of yard waste; 20 percent consisted of construction and demolition debris
and wood pallets.
Recycled Wood Products charges the City of Berkeley $24.75 per ton of yard waste delivered.
Landscapers and private individuals are charged a tipping fee of $25 per ton, or $4 per cubic yard;7 $2
per cubic yard is charged for clean wood and pallets. Material is tipped on the floor of the Recycled
Wood Product's facility and contaminants, such as paper and plastic, are removed. The material is
watered and fed into a Fuel Harvester Tub Grinder. After the material is ground, it moves along a
conveyor belt, where it is watered again, to a Fuel Harvester Screen. Contaminants, including painted
wood and nails (which are subsequently sold to scrap dealers), are removed, and the material is
screened to three different dimensions; 90 percent of materials are screened to either a mulch product, or
a finer product for composting. Ten percent of materials, generally from pallet manufacturers (not
Berkeley yard waste), are formed into fuel pellets. Some screened material is sold to the Bay Area
Waste District, prior to composting, as a bulking agent in its sludge composting program. Material
designated for composting is watered again until a 50 percent moisture content has been achieved. The
compost is mixed with the mulch product and formed into windrows 60 feet long, 20 feet wide, and 10
feet high. Windrows are turned weekly for a period of 2 months. Internal windrow temperatures,
measured daily, are maintained at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit. Finished compost is screened
through one of two different trommel mill screens to produce one of two end products: either a fine soil
amendment 1/4 inch wide, or a mulch product to 21/2 inches wide. Compost is frequently tested for lead
and nutrient content. The demand for the finer-grained soil amendment exceeds the demand for the
mulch. The soil amendment is sold wholesale for $7 per cubic yard primarily to nurseries for use in
potting soils. A small amount is sold to Berkeley businesses and residents at $15 per cubic yard. An
estimated 0.2 percent of all incoming materials, including dirt and rocks, is landfilled.
The composting operation at Recycled Wood Products' facility is currently operating at maximum
capacity, constrained by its small size. High winds sometimes create odor problems for residents
nearby. The University of California, which currently leases this site to Recycled Wood Products, is
reportedly considering other uses for this land. As a consequence, this program may have to move to a
different facility, or reduce the quantities composted. The City is actively looking for an alternative
composting site, in or outside of the City.
Page 36
-------
Berkeley, California
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
Material Total
(Tons, July 1990-June 1991)
Newspaper 6,847
Corrugated Cardboard 4,976
High-grade Paper 890
Other Paper* 710
Glasst 3,643
PET Plastic* 7
HOPE Plastic 4
Film Plastic 22
Aluminum Cans* 318
Ferrous Cans 492
Appliances/White Goods 674
Other Metal 58
WoodWaste§ 56
Textiles 219
Other Reusablestt 1,141
Miscellaneous 309
Subtotal MSW Recycled 20,366
Landscapers' Waste 1,500
Other Yard Waste 1,500
Subtotal MSW Composted 3,000
Total MSW Recovered 23,366
Concrete/Asphalt" 36,000
Wood Waste 3,369
Other Building Materials 224
Total C&O Recycled 39,593
Total Materials Recycled 59,959
Total Materials Composted 3,000
Total Materials Recovered 62,959
Note: Materials are not tracked by sector. Tonnage listed represents marketed material, and includes all recydabtes collected in
the City including deposit containers.
'includes mixed paper such as magazines.
tlndudes 2.874 tons of redeemable glass and 59 tons of refillable wine bottles.
^Redeemable containers.
§lndudes 28 tons of reconditioned pallets. An additional 140 tons of wood waste was salvaged by the 415 Society, a nonprofit
group, but because this material was burned as firewood, it is not listed in the above tonnages.
"Annual tonnages of concrete and asphalt recovered were estimated from 6 months worth of data.
ttlndudes doors and other wooden building materials.
Page 37
-------
feriuifef* California
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered By Method and Recyder
(FY1991)
Material
Newspaper
Corrugated/Kraft
Other Papert
Plastic
Glass
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous Cans
White Goods
Scrap
Wood
Textiles
Reusables
Other
Subtotal Recycled
Yard Waste
Subtotal Compost
Total MSW
Recovered
Wood
Building Materials
Concrete/Asphalt
Subtotal C&D
Total Waste
Recovered
Res-CS
(Tons)
3.841
0
50
0
1.963
30
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,984
1.500
1,500
7,484
0
0
0
0
7,484
CCC-DO
(Tons)
490
200
760
0
304
6
61
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,821
0
0
1,821
0
0
0
0
1,821
CCC-BB Com-CS
(Tons) (Tons)
640
590
22
7
895
124
90
0
18
0
0
0
0
2,386
0
0
2,386
0
0
0
0
2,386
250
100
150
0
240
50
200
0
0
0
0
0
0
990
0
0
990
0
0
0
0
990
UO* UC
(Tons) (Tons)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
674
0
0
0
1.123
0
1,797
0
0
1,797
3.369
224
0
3,593
5,390
306
306
102
0
97
8
41
0
40
0
0
0
900
0
0
900
0
0
0
0
900
Other
(Tons)
1.320
3,780
516
26
144
100
0
0
0
56
219
18
309
6,488
1,500
1,500
7,988
0
0
36,000
36,000
43,988
Total
(Tons)
6,847
4,976
1,600
33
3,643
318
492
674
58
56
219
1,141
309
20,366
3,000
3,000
23,366
3,369
224
36,000
39,593
62,959
Key. Res = Residential Com - Commercial OS . Curbskte Coltedion DO .= Dropoff Collection BB-Buy Back
UO = Urban Ore salvage/reclaim operation
CCC = Community Conservation Center UC= The Associated Students of the University of California at Berkeley
Other = includes material recovered outside of the City (exports)
•Urban Ore materials listed above were collected through its Building Materials Exchange and Discard Management Center. A small
amount of this material was collected at other salvage operations located in the City.
tlndudes mixed paper and high grades.
Page 38
-------
Berkeley, California
Residential Curbside Recycling Program
(Annual Tonnages June 1988 to May 1989 and July 1990 to June 1991)
Material
Newspaper
Other Paper
Glass
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous Cans
Total MSW Recycled
Total
(Tons, 1988-89)*
1,249
0
749
8
38
2,044
Total
(Tons, 1990-91)
3,841
50
1,963
30
100
5,984
Percent
Change
+193%
Note: During 1988-89 the Ecology Center made a transition from monthly to weekly collection of recydables. In 1990-91.
recydabtes were collected on a weekly basis throughout the City.
•Annual estimate extrapolated from the average of September and December 1988 and March and June 1989 monthly data. Source:
CAL Recovery Systems. Inc. Waste Characterization Study for Berkeley, California, November 1989.
Source Reduction Initiatives
Berkeley values source reduction as the most desirable method of waste management and boasts a
number of innovative source reduction programs. In its 1991 Source Reduction and Recycling Elements,
Berkeley establishes a solid waste source reduction goal of 8.43 percent of the waste stream by 1995 and
13.45 percent of the waste stream by the year 2000. Using the California definition that source
reduction is the diversion of waste before it enters a transfer, disposal, or recycling processing station,
Berkeley estimates that it is currently diverting at least 3.3 percent of the waste stream through source
reduction, including its reusable goods drop-off programs (86 percent of diverted materials), residential
use of cloth diaper services, and used clothing stores. It also details how its source reduction goals will
be achieved and establishes a goal of averting 2.8 percent of the waste stream by 1995 through reusable
goods drop-off sites, 6 percent through home composting, approximately 1 percent through junk mail
reduction, and 4 percent of the waste through other activities such as volume-based refuse rates and
packaging and disposable product reduction.
Berkeley conducted the nation's first "precycling" campaign in 1989, urging consumers to prevent the
generation of waste through environmentally-minded purchasing practices. The word "precycling,"
coined by Berkeley, has now entered common usage among recycling solid waste planners. Drawing on
information provided by the Ecology Center and other community and environmental groups, the
Department of Public Works has promoted the precycling concept through fliers and newspaper
advertisements. To quote from the campaign's literature, "Sometimes the answers to our biggest
problems are right within our reach. In this case, one solution to our waste problem may be in what we
reach for on the supermarket shelf.... What we buy has a direct relationship to what we throw away
and what we throw away contributes to the problem of diminishing landfill space and increasing costs
for waste disposal.... Precycling is a revolutionary way of thinking about waste and, among other
things, calls for a peaceful overthrow of wasteful plastic and other materials that are difficult to
recycle." The City encourages local merchants to offer discounts to customers who bring their own
containers and to use reusable napkins and silverware. Because Berkeley has not tracked its waste
generation rates or waste composition since 1989, it cannot accurately determine how this program has
changed the composition or volume of its waste stream.
Page 39
-------
Berkeley, California
Publicity and Education
Berkeley has long been in the forefront of the nation's recycling activities. The City has spent
between $25,000 and $30,000 per year on public information and education programs administered
either by the City or through contractors. The Ecology Center (EC) serves as a clearinghouse for
environmental information and maintains a bookstore and library. The Ecology Center developed three
education and publicity programs: "the Recyclones" cartoon characters, which reinforce recycling
concepts; an information hotline; and a recycling lottery with money obtained from a State grant.
Through the "Bottle Bop," the "Can Can-Can," and the "Bundle Boogie," the well-liked Recyclones
explain how to prepare materials for Berkeley's source-separation recycling program. EC's hotline,
staffed during business hours, provides information about the residential curbside program and other
recycling and environmental activities. The Community Conservation Center and the Public Works
Department also run recycling hotlines. Through the Ecology Center, the City ran a weekly recycling
lottery in which a cash bonus of $250 was offered to a randomly selected household found to be properly
separating refuse and recyclables. If the selected household was found not to be properly separating
recyclables, the pot increased by $250 the next week. The lottery, funded through a grant from the
California State Department of Conservation with container deposit funds, ended in 1989.
The City has a quarterly newsletter that frequently publicizes recycling and composting programs.
Economics
Costs Coven
te City pays for the collection and processing of 5,984 tons of residential
recyclables collected at curbside, and 2,386 tons collected at the Berkeley Buy
Back through contract fees paid to Ecology Center and CCC. These costs are
presented under operating and maintenance costs. The City also provides
administrative support for the collection of 1,821 tons at CCCs drop-off sites.
The City also purchased certain capital equipment for EC's and CCCs
programs, which are presented below.
Also listed below are the City's capital and operating and maintenance costs
for the collection of 990 tons of recyclables from businesses, institutions, and a
few apartment buildings. The cost for collection and processing of 1,500 tons of
yard waste collected through the City's pilot program is presented under
operating and maintenance costs. Capital costs for this program are not
available.
Urban Ore's capital expenditures for their salvage/reuse operations (5,390
tons) are listed below too. Note that the City's administration and
education/publicity costs given below under O&M cover Urban Ore's program,
in addition to the other City programs.
Page 40
-------
Berkeley, California
Capital Costs; Collection
Item
3 CMC/Chevrolet C-55*
International Truckt
3 Lodal 2050 @ $75,000t
2Lodal2300@$100,OOOt
70 Curbslde Truck Binst
50 3-cubic-yard Binst
SScalest
Custom-designed Front-
loading Commercial Recycling
Vehiclet
Roll-off Truck*
50,000 Waxed Tote Boxes @
$1.50t
Packer Truck @50%t
Cost
NA
NA
$225,000
200,000
25,000
15,000
25,000
100,000
50,000
75,000
NA
Use/User
Recycling/EC
Recycling/EC
Recycling/EC
Recycling/EC
Recycling/EC
Recycling/EC & CCC
Recyding/CCC
Recycling/City
Recyding/CCC
Recycling/EC
Composting/City
Year Incurred
1975
1975
1989
1990
1973-89
1982
1982
1989
1973
1988-89
1981
Key. EC = Ecology Center; CCC = Community Conservation Center.
Note: All the above equipment was paid for in full at the time of purchase. The purchase of the packer truck pre-dated the
composting program.
'Equipment purchased and owned by the Ecology Center.
^Equipment purchased and owned by the City.
^Equipment purchased and owned by the Community Conservation Centers.
Capital Costs; Processing
item
Horizontal Baler
4 Forklifts*
Aluminum Separator
Glass Conveyor
40-foot Conveyor System
Cost
$180,000
80,000
25,000
25,000
110,000
Use/User
Recyding/CCC
Recycling/EC & CCC
Recycling/EC
Recycling/EC
Recyding/CCC
Year Incurred
1983
1980,1988
1983
1987
1991
Note. All the above equipment was purchased and is owned by the City. It was paid for in full at the time of purchase.
Two forklifts were purchased and are owned by the City, one by the Ecology center, and one by the Community Conservation
Centers.
Page 41
-------
Berkeley, Ctffoni*
Urban Ore's Capital Costs
Item
5 Temporary Buildings
12-foot Parcel Van
EOF Ford 17-foot Flat Bed
Ford Pick-up Truck
2 ForkJifts (Used)
Apple Computer
60 Door Storage Racks
70 Window Racks
Cost
1© $3,500
3 @20,000
1@ 1,000
8,000
11,000
11,000
75,000
NA
600
14,000
Year Incurred
1980
NA
1988
1986
1988
1991
1989
NA
1983-91
1983-91
Note: Most of Urban Ore's equipment was purchased used or acquired through barter.
Annual and Per Ton Operating and Maintenance Costs (FY1991)
Recycling Subtotal
Collection and Processing
Curbside Residential (EC)*
Commercial/Institutional (City)*
Buy Back (CCC)*
Drop off (CCC)
Administration*
Education/Publicity*
Composting Subtotal
Collection and Processing
Administration*
Education/Publicity*
Recycling & Composting Total
Collection and Processing
Administrations
Education/Publicity^
Cost
NA
$700,000
400,000
275,000
25,000
0
NA
NA
NA
$178,000
NA
NA
$1,178,000
$878,000
275,000
25,000
Tons Covered Per Ton Cost
11,181
11,181
5,984
990
2,386
1,821
11,181
11,181
1,500
1,500
1,500
1,500
12,681
12,681
18,071
18,071
NA
$63
67
278
10
0
NA
NA
NA
$119
NA
NA
$93
$69
15
1
Note: Costs presented above represent the City of Berkeley's operating and maintenance oasts only.
•Represents fee paid to contractor. ECs 1990 contract fee was a flat fee (paid monthly) based on actual costs, of the number of
households serviced.
*The high cost for the commercial curbside pick-up program is partially due to the fact mat this was a pilot program with only
350 stops and the amount collected was small. The City is currently expanding the program to include 1,000 stops and estimates
that costs will decrease to $100 per ton.
^Administration and education/publicity costs cannot be broken down between recycling and composting programs.
§Urban Ore's recovery programs (5,390 tons) are covered under these costs as the City assists in the promotion and support of
Urban Ore (e.g., the City leases land and buildings to Urban Ore).
Page 42
-------
Berkeley, California
In 1985 the City first formally contracted ECs and CCCs drop-off recycling services. The contract
fees paid to these organizations covered the difference between the programs' cost and revenues earned
from the sale of recyclable materials. Under its contract with EC, the City pays a fee, or waste
diversion credit, for every ton of material collected. The credit is based on a sliding scale tied to the
door price of newspaper. In fiscal year 1991, the City paid Ecology Center $400,00 for the collection
and processing of recyclable materials, and paid CCC $25,000 for the operation of two drop-off and one
buy-back center. The City purchased most of the capital equipment for ECs collection and processing
program, including collection trucks and curbside recycling containers. In fiscal year 1991, Urban Ore
paid the City $2,500 per month (or $30,000 per year) for use of City property. Since 1983 Urban Ore's
license agreement requires it to pay the City 10 percent of its monthly gross revenues, totalling up to
$2,900 per month (in June 1991).
Materials Revenues: Materials revenue from the residential curbside program are kept by the
Ecology Center. In FY 1989, EC earned $170,035. In FY 1990, the CCC
earned $928395 in gross sales.
Source of Funding: City recycling activities are funded by refuse collection and transfer
station fees.
Full-time Employees: 37. 6 City employees (3 with the commercial program, 3 with program
administration), 14 with the Ecology Center, 11 with the Berkeley Buy
Back center, and 6 with Urban Ore.
Part-time Employees: 10
Future Solid Waste Management Plans
The City of Berkeley plans to expand its recycling and composting programs within the next year.
It intends, through its contract with the Ecology Center, to provide citywide curbside collection of
mixed paper, magazines, and corrugated cardboard beginning July 1992. The City hopes to expand its
collection of recyclable materials from multi-unit buildings. In 1991 the City Council drafted a law
mandating recycling in the commercial sector. Public hearings on this law will be held in December
1991.
Contacts
James Liljenwall Kathy Evans
Recycling Program Manager Program Director
City of Berkeley—Public Works Department Community Conservation Centers
2180 Milvia Street 2530 San Pablo Ave., Suite F
Berkeley, CA 94704 Berkeley, CA 94702
Phone (510) 644-8893 Phone (510) 524-0113
Fax (510) 644-8641
Page 43
-------
John A. Williams
Sales Manager
American Rock & Asphalt, Inc.
961 Western Dr.
Richmond, CA 94801-3798
Phone (510) 233-8362
Fax (510) 970-7714
Fred Remington
Manager of Southwest Operations
Recycled Wood Products
Berkeley, CA 94710
Phone (510) 525-4557
Fax (510) 525-6202
Berke .--y, California
Chris Clarke •»•»•
Recycling Information Coordinator
Ecology Center, Inc.
2530 San Pablo Ave.
Berkeley, CA 94702
Phone (510) 548-2220
Daniel Knapp
Urban Ore, Inc.
1325 Sixth Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
Phone (510) 526-7080
Fax (510) 235-0191
Nancy Skinner
City Council Member
City of Berkeley
2180 Milvia St.
Berkeley, CA 94704
Phone (510) 644-6359
References
Source Reduction and Recycling Element for the City of Berkeley (Preliminary Draft). City of Berkeley
Department of Public Works, June 10,1991.
Cal Recovery Systems, Incorporated. Waste Characterization Study for Berkeley, California. CSS
Report N D, 1183, November 1989. :
Problem* and Opportunities in Solid Waste Management: A Data Base for New Jersey Decision Makers.
Washington, D.C.: Institute for Local Self-Reliance, 1987.
Gildea Resource Center. Solid Waste Management Plan - City of Berkeley. Santa Barbara: Community
Environmental Council, Ju; 1986.
Page 44
-------
Berkeley, California
Endnotes
^The City of Berkley considers putresrible refuse to be mixed waste containing wet garbage.
2This set-out ratio is based on multipliers that Waste Management of North America, Inc. has found to be
accurate for weekly programs; these range from 2 to 2.5. Source: The National Recycling Coalition Measurement
Standards and Reporting Guidelines, National Recycling Coalition, October 1989.
3According to the Ecology Center (EQ, newspaper should comprise approximately 60 percent of collected
materials, but has typically accounted for 65 to 80 percent of its total. Therefore, EC estimates that it is losing
40,000 glass or metal containers each month. (Chris Clarke, Recycling Information Coordinator, Ecology Center,
Inc., Personal communication, July 29,1991.)
^American Rock & Asphalt uses a conversion factor of 1 cubic yard of broken concrete and asphalt to 13 tons
(personal communication, July 29,1991).
5John Williams, American Rock & Asphalt, Inc., Richmond, CA, personal communications, July 29,1991 and
August 2,1991.
6 An independent consulting firm used a conversion factor of 18 cubic yards per ton to convert this 1985 volume to
3,520 tons. Urban Ore claims the density of yard waste it received was 4 cubic yards per ton and thus estimates it
composted 14,200 tons of yard waste in 1985.
7Based on a yard waste density of approximately 620 Ibs per cubic yard.
Page 45
-------
Lincoln, Nebrasto
:ted.,
.'holdr
Page 46
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
Lincoln,
Nebraska
Demographics
Jurisdiction: City of Lincoln
Population:
Area:
Total Households:
Total Businesses and
Institutions:
Brief Description:
191,972 in 1990 (An additional 21,669 residents live in the surrounding
Lancaster County)
64 square miles
79,079 (49,993 in single-family residences, 13,233 in two- to nine-unit
buildings, 12,995 in buildings with ten units or more, and 2,858 mobile
homes)
7,500 businesses, 70 schools, and 4 universities, including the University of
Nebraska
Lincoln, Nebraska's state capital, experienced a population growth of 10
percent between 1980 and 1990. The service sector employs 39 percent of
all employees in Lancaster County, followed by office and retail jobs. The
State government and the University of Nebraska employ a total of
16,510 people. Lincoln's unemployment rate in 1990 was 1.7 percent, well
below the national average of 5.5 percent. Per capita income was $16,067
in 1990, and median household income was $38,561.
Page 47
-------
UnaOn, Nebraska
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
Annual Tonnages (1990)
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
Disposed*
Incinerated
LandfiUed
Generated
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
Residential
4,548
4,081
467
130,812
0
130,812
135,360
Comm/
Instlt
21,027
21,027
0
61,962
1,000
60,962
82,989
Other*
1,835
1,835
-
1,835
Total MSW
27,410
25,108
2,302
192,774
1,000
191,774
220,184
C&Dt
193,167
193,167
0
12,979
0
12,979
206,146
Total Waste
220,577
218,275
2,302
205,753
1,000
204,753
426,330
Percent by Weight Recovered
3%
3%
§
25%
25%
0%
12%
11%
1%
94%
94%
0%
52%
51%
§
* Yard waste self-hauled to the transfer station. This tonnage cannot be broken down by residential and commt
I sect
t 133,167 tons of construction and demolition debris that was less than 50 percent burnable were collected at the 48th Street
facility and used as fill material to dose the landfill. Private haulers recovered an estimated 60,000 tons of concrete and asphalt in
1990, which was used for road resurfacing, or to make new asphalt A small amount of this material may come from parts of
Lancaster County outside of the City of Lincoln.
^Residential and commercial waste disposed includes tires.
§ Less than 1 percent
Landfill Tipping Fee:
Refuse Collection and
Disposal:
$8.00 per ton in 1988,1989, and 1990; projected to increase to $12.00 per ton
in 1992
The City's residential and commercial sectors are serviced with refuse
collection and disposal by 37 private haulers. Haulers collect refuse twice
a week. Typically, residents are charged between $11 and $13 per month
for back door service with no limit on the quantity collected. Until 1988
refuse was disposed of at the 48th Street Landfill. In 1988 a new landfill
was opened on Bluff Road, 3 miles from the City, and the 48th Street site
was converted to a transfer station accepting primarily white goods, brush,
and yard waste. Approximately 5 percent of the population self-hauls
garbage to the transfer station. Beginning in mid-1988, waste has been
disposed at the Bluff Road Landfill, which has an estimated lifespan of
28 years. Construction and demolition debris, provided it is less than 50
percent burnable, is used as a fill material to close the 48th Street
Landfill. Otherwise, it is hauled to the Bluff Road Landfill for disposal.
Tires can be landfilled for $1 per tire. Large loads (roll-off boxes or dump
trucks) are charged at a rate of $15 per ton (approximately $030 per tire)
plus a $25 landfilling fee.
Page 48
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
Total Waste Recovered and Disposed (Percent by Weight, 1990)
Disposed 48% Recovered 52%
Residential Recycled 1%
Residential Disposed 31%
_ai_^_iinasmss^ C*0 Recycled 45%
C&D Disposed3%
Comm/lnst Disposed 14%
\r cr
Comm/lnst Recycled 5%
Note: Due to rounding, numbers do not add to 100%.
Materials Recovery Overview
Goals and Legislative None in 1990. The 1992 State Integrated Solid Waste Management Act
Requirements: banned the landfilling of leaves and grass dippings as of September 1994,
and lead-acid batteries, whole tires, and waste oil by September 1995.
The Lincoln City Council has banned the landfilling of yard waste,
effective October 1992.
Drop-off sites have characterized the collection system for recyclables in Lincoln. On Earth Day
1970, a group of students and activists from the University of Nebraska formed the Citizens for
Environmental Improvement (CEI). The mission of this nonprofit organization was to preserve the
environment through recycling and conservation. Initially, CEI established a single drop-off site for
newspaper, open to residents and commercial establishments in Lincoln. By 1989 CEI was operating 15
drop-off sites. Four of these were multimaterial drop-off sites accepting newspaper, aluminum and
ferrous cans, glass, and HDPE and PET plastics. The others handled only newspaper. In 1985 CEI began
collecting high-grade paper from office buildings. The group was also active in education;
representatives from CEI held workshops on recycling for schoolchildren. In 1990 workshops were
conducted up to three times per week.
As the selling price of old newsprint dropped, CEI experienced financial difficulties. In October
1990, the City took over the collection of newspaper at all 15 sites, contracting with Dennis Paper
Sales, a local processor, to supply the bins and collect and process the material, for which the the City
Page 49
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
paid $15 per ton. CEI continued to accept aluminum, glass, ferrous cans, and plastics at the four multi-
material drop-off sites until February 1991, when the group could no longer cover its operating costs and
ceased operation. Lincoln's Office of Recycling took over the four sites and contracted with Nebraska
Recycling Center for collection and processing of recydables. The Office is in the process of opening 10
new drop-off sites, and the City has allocated $80,700 to the Office of Recycling for updating the
voluntary drop-off program.
The first curbside program initiated in Lincoln was a yard waste collection program. In 1988 the
City contracted with three private haulers for the collection of leaves and grass dippings from
approximately 1,400 households in four neighborhoods of the City. By 1989 the program was expanded
to service 2,000 households. In mid-1989, the program was further expanded to include the collection of
newspapers and aluminum cans from those residents participating in the pilot yard waste program in
two of the four neighborhoods. The purpose of the expansion was threefold: (1) to determine the
demand for curbside recycling, (2)* to estimate tonnages that could be recovered at curbside if the
program went citywide, and (3) to estimate the cost for the implementation of such a program. Lincoln
has been conservative in its move toward a large-scale curbside program. Both the collection of yard
waste and the collection of recyclable materials are still in pilot stages.
In 1991 the Mayor established a separate Recycling Division within the Economic Development
Department of the Mayor's Office. Perhaps as a result, the private sector has played and will continue
to play a large role in materials recovery hi-Lincoln. In 1990 municipal recovery programs recovered
only 3 percent of the residential waste stream, while 25 percent of the commercial waste stream was
recovered through public and private recycling and composting activities. The City initiated a pilot
bottle recycling project in conjunction with a local processor, the Nebraska Recycling Center, to
facilitate the recovery of glass bottles from bars and restaurants throughout the City. Together with
the University of Nebraska, the Recycling Office conducted waste audits of ten local businesses to
establish models for similar businesses wanting to reduce their waste disposal. In 1992 the City
decided to discontinue its Municipal recycling curbside program, due to poor market conditions in the
region.
Rather than purchasing fill for dosing the City's former landfill, Lincoln is using construction and
demolition debris diverted from landfill disposal. The City is also using sewage sludge from the local
wastewater treatment plant as a soil amendment at the old landfill. Special liquid wastes and
household hazardous waste are also collected separately. The Health Department operates a drop-off
site where residents can dispose of hazardous waste four times a year.
Although Nebraska has no solid waste reduction goals, the State has given some financial support
to community recycling programs. In 1979 the Nebraska Litter Reduction and Recyding Act was passed
for the purpose of funding programs to reduce, clean up, and recycle litter and to conserve natural
resources. As of June 1987, the Environmental Control Council voted to allocate 40 percent of the fund for
"new and improved community recycling and source separation programs." More recently, the State
passed the Waste Reduction and Recycling Incentives Act (LB 163, July 1990), which requires that the
State complete a comprehensive solid waste management plan by December 1991. The law also
provides that a fee of $1 be assessed on all new tires sold in the State as of October 1990, and that
nominal annual fees of $25 and $50 be assessed on retailers of all tangible goods. The revenue generated
from these fees will go towards funding municipal waste reduction and recycling programs.
Page 50
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
Recycling Activities
Residential Curbside Recycling (Pilot Program)
Start-up Date:
Service Providers:
Pick-up Frequency:
Same Day as Refuse
Households Served:
Mandatory:
Participation Rate:
Materials Collected:
Set-out Method:
Collection Method and
Vehicles:
Economic Incentives:
Enforcement:
Annual Tonnage
Pilot program began in the summer of 1989. The City does not have plans
to expand citywide at this time.
Palmer & Sons Refuse and Niederhaus Brothers under contract with the
City
Weekly
No
622 households volunteered to participate in the pilot project. (Palmer &
Sons services 324 households, and Niederhaus Brothers services 294
households.)
No
51 percent of households that volunteered for the pilot program set out
recyclable materials or yard waste weekly.
Newspaper and aluminum cans in 1989. Ferrous cans and glass were added
in 1991.
Residents are requested to source-separate materials. Newspapers,
aluminum cans, and color-sorted glass may be set out in separate bags or
boxes.
Palmer & Sons Refuse added a 1-cubic-yard container to the front bumper
of a packer truck for the collection of newspaper, and uses side bins for
collecting aluminum cans. Niederhaus Brothers placed two containers on
a trailer pulled by a 1-ton cab, to facilitate separate collection of
aluminum cans and newspapers. The City awarded each hauler $500 for
these upgrades.
In 1991 a local vehicle manufacturer, Cushman Inc., designed a recycling
vehicle and donated it to Lincoln for the City to evaluate in its pilot
program. The vehicle has three hoppers, each of which is divided in
two. A one-person crew color-sorts glass as needed and deposits green,
amber, and flint glass, ferrous cans, aluminum cans, and newspaper each in
separate bins.
None
Not applicable
30 tons from July 1990 through June 1991
Recycle With Michael, Recycling Enterprises, and BCD Recycling offer curbside collection of
recyclables to residents for a fee. Recycle With Michael, the largest provider, began offering
bimonthly curbside recycling service to 12 households in June 1990 for a $3 monthly fee. Unable to cover
operating costs, Recycle With Michael increased the fee to $5 per month. By the end of 1990, the
company was serving 185 households in Lincoln; as of mid-1991, it was serving 400 households. Recycle
With Michael guarantees to the customer that recyclables will be recycled and not disposed. The
company asks that residents place commingled glass bottles and jars, aluminum, tin cans, and plastic
Page 51
-------
Lincoln, Nebfaske
containers (HOPE milk jugs and colored detergent bottles, PET plastics, and polystyrene) into a recycled
plastic bag, and that paper (newspaper, corrugated cardboard, white ledger, colored ledger, and
computer paper) be separated by grade and placed in paper bags. In 1991 Recycle With Michael
provided each customer with 24 bags made from 100 percent recycled plastic, which are in turn recycled
by the supplier.
Recycling Enterprises began collecting recydables at curbside in March 1991. As of mid-1991, the
company collected glass, aluminum, tin, newspaper, PET, HOPE, polystyrene, and corrugated cardboard
from 80 househ Us for a $3 monthly fee. Residents put all materials at the curbside commingled. A
one-person crew collects the recydables with a 1/2-ton pick-up, and sorts the materials en route. BCD
Recycling has 350 residential accounts. BCD offers monthly collection of glass, tin, aluminum, and
HDPE and PET plastics for $5 per month.
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling
Legislative
Requirements:
Service Providers:
Number Served:
Type Served:
Pick-up Frequency:
Materials Collected:
Set-out and Collection
Method:
None
Dennis Paper Sales, Nebraska Recycling Center
Dennis Paper Sales serves approximately 300 businesses; Nebraska
Recycling Center serves approximately 50 businesses.
Dennis Paper Sales serves office buildings and small businesses. As of
1991 it holds the contract for the collection of paper from State office
buildings and the prison system. Nebraska Recycling Center services a
few large accounts, including Goodyear Tire, and the Lincoln Office of
Mental Health. Nebraska Recycling Center held the contract for State
office buildings (including the State Capitol and the State Office
Building) in 1990.
Dennis Paper Sales picks up paper every other day from some accounts,
weekly from others, and on an on-call basis from low-volume generators.
Nebraska Recycling Center provides weekly collection of recyclable
materials.
Dennis Paper Sales collects mixed file stock paper, white and colored
ledger, and computer print-out from commercial accounts. Nebraska
Recycling Center collects high-grade white ledger, computer paper, and
aluminum cans.
Dennis Paper Sales provides 40- and 44-gallon barrels to customers as
needed. As of mid-1991, the company had provided 10,000 barrels.
Large-volume customers are supplied with 90-gallon roll-carts or
dumpsters. One-person crews with utility vans collect materials. Larger
accounts are serviced by a two-person crew using a packer truck.
Nebraska Recycling Center provides barrels that are placed on each floor
of the building being serviced. When the barrels are full, custodial staff
bring them to a basement storage area. Nebraska Recycling Center
contracts with a hauler for night-time collection and delivery of the
materials to the processing center.
Page 52
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
Incentives: Dennis Paper Sales and Nebraska Recycling Center offer recycling
collection, but Dennis Paper Sales charges some customers for the
shredding of confidential documents.
Annual Tonnage Not available. Dennis Paper Sales estimates that it processes 4,000 tons
of paper and 2,000 tons of glass and aluminum containers per month from
the commercial sector, of which approximately 60 percent is generated in
Lincoln, bringing its annual tonnage to 43,200 tons. Lincoln's recycling
coordinator believes that this is an overestimate.
The City has initiated several pilot programs in the commercial sector. In September 1990, the
City negotiated with Nebraska Recycling Center for the collection of glass from ten bars and
restaurants. The businesses combined generated an average of 8 tons of glass per month. The program
was supported by a grant from the State Litter Reduction and Recycling Fund, which provided money to
purchase barrels and posters and to conduct a study on the effectiveness of the program. At the end of
the 1-year pilot government funds will no longer be available for equipment. Five of the ten businesses
have agreed to pay a $1.50 monthly fee for the recycling barrels, and the Lancaster County Office of
the Mentally Retarded (LOMR) has agreed to collect and sort the glass. The LOMR is raising
additional funding in the amount of $5,000 to $7,500 from local bottlers and liquor distributors, and
anticipates an expansion of the program to include other areas of the City.
Ten area businesses participated in a waste assessment project conducted by the City Recycling
Office and the University of Nebraska Civil Engineering Department. Program participants estimated
that 30 to 65 percent of their waste stream had been diverted through recycling. While insufficient
staffing has limited the program's success, Recycling Coordinator Gene Hanlon notes some of its
achievements: the office building that recycled 29.8 percent of its waste (266 of the 8,935 tons
generated), the manufacturer that recycled 65 percent (55 of the 85 tons of waste generated), and the
pharmaceutical company that diverted 392 percent of its waste from landfill disposal.
Drop-off Centers
Number and Type 22 (6 buy-back centers and 16 drop-off centers). Nebraska Recycling
Center has one large multimaterial buy-back at the processing facility,
and one other small buy-back for aluminum cans.
Public or Private: Private and public, hi October 1990 the Recycling Office took over the
collection of old newsprint from 15 drop-off sites previously operated by
the nonprofit organization CEI.
Sectors Served: Residential and commercial/institutional sectors
Materials Accepted: Newspaper, glass, aluminum and ferrous cans, PET soda bottles, and
HOPE milk jugs are collected at drop-off sites. Private recyclers buy back
scrap aluminum, brass, copper, high-grade paper, and corrugated
cardboard; they also accept white goods. Motor oil can be taken free of
charge to numerous city service stations or to the Lincoln Police
Department auto garage.
Annual Tonnage: An estimated 3,964 tons of recyclable materials are collected through
drop-off sites annually. Of this, 390 tons were collected through City-
operated drop-offs from October through December 1990. The remaining
3,574 tons were collected through private drop-off and buy-back sites.
Page 53
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
In the summer of 1991, the City sought bids to establish 10 to 12 new dropoff sites for newspaper,
glass, aluminum and ferrous cans, HOPE milk jugs, and PET soda bottles.
Construction & Demolition Debris Recovery
In 1990 Lincoln diverted 133,167 tons of construction and demolition debris. Generators of
construction and demotion debris that is less than 50 percent combustible can bring the material to the
former landfill on 48th Street, where it is used as fill material. Lincoln estimates that it will take 6 to
8 years to complete the closure of the landfill, at which time a separate landfill will be established
for construction or demolition rubble- Lincoln requires in its bid specifications that contractors that work
on City streets and lots be required to recycle the material. The Office of Recycling surveyed three
contractors in Lincoln that reported recycling a total of 60,000 tons of concrete and asphalt generated in
Lincoln in 1990. These companies use (he material primarily as aggregate in road resurfacing, saving
them approximately $5 per ton. Ho figure is available for the tonnages of C&D debris recycled
privately in 1990.
Salvage/Reuse
Household items, including appliances, furniture, and clothing, are collected in Lincoln at Goodwill
Industries, the Junior League Thrift Shop, the Salvation Army, the People's City Mission, and two
other thrift stores. In 1990 the City began to separate white goods at the transfer station. The program
was expanded in 1991 to include all metals except refrigerators and freezers.
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables
There are two main processors of recyclable materials in the City of Lincoln: Dennis Paper Sales
and the Nebraska Recycling Center. Newspaper from the City's residential curbside pilot program and
from the 15 drop-off sites taken over by the City in October 1990 is processed at Dennis Paper Sales.
Aluminum cans collected through the curbside program, as well as glass, plastic, and ferrous containers
collected through the four multimaterial drop-off sites, are processed at the Nebraska Recycling
Center. In addition, both companies process recyclable materials from their own buy-back sites, from
other private drop-off sites, and front the commercial sector.
Dennis Paper Sales is a company that has been processing waste paper for more than 35 years. An
estimated 72,000 tons of recyclable materials (48,000 tons of paper and 24,000 tons of glass and aluminum
per year) are processed at the 55,000-square-foot facility each year; approximately 60 percent of this
amount is generated in Lincoln. The intermediate processing center has the capacity to handle
approximately 260 tons per day. More the $2 million worth of capital equipment is used in the
processing operation. High-grade paper is so.:vad and baled; corrugated cardboard and old newsprint
are baled. Other paper is conveyed to a hammermill, where it is shredded and baled. To reduce
operating costs, Dennis Paper Sales has asked commercial customers to separate paper into newspaper,
white ledger, computer paper, and high-grade colored ledger, or to fill ten barrels before calling for
pick-up. Due to a severe glut in the market, the company is considering scaling back to collecting only
white office paper and computer print-out from commercial customers.
Nebraska Recycling Center began operating in 1977. A lugnetic sorter separates ferrous metals
from other materials. Aluminum is densified and baled in a bisquette baler. Color-sorted glass is
crushed and stored in Gaylord boxes. Tin cans are densified and baled. In 1991 Nebraska Recycling
Center began recycling PET and HDPE plastics collected from residents through drop-off and at
Page 54
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
curbside. Plastics are baled and sold to the best available markets. In addition to processing
recyclables brought in by residents and through the residential curbside program in Lincoln, Nebraska
Recycling Center offers collection and processing of recyclable materials to many small towns within a
50 to 100 mile radius of the processing facility, to six nonprofit organizations, and to several for-profit
groups. In 1990 Nebraska Recycling Center had a contract with the State for the collection of office
paper and mixed paper from the State Capitol building and the State Office Building. The State
supplied desktop boxes and storage bins for each floor; custodial staff collected the paper and brought
it to a central storage area in the basement of each building, where Nebraska Recycling Center crews
collected the paper. In 1991 NRC declined to bid on the State contract, which was awarded to Dennis
Paper Sales.
In June 1991, Recycle With Michael, a small company that collects recyclable materials at curbside
from the residential sector in Lincoln, began processing plastics in its 6,000-square-foot facility.
Numbers 1,2, and 6 plastics are collected, baled, and sold to a recycler in Chicago, Illinois. A baler and
a forklift were provided under a grant from the Department of Environmental Control.
Markets for recyclable materials in Nebraska are severely depressed. The only users of scrap paper
in the State are insulation companies such as Parco Insulation in Norfolk and Nebraska Insulation in
Omaha. Nebraska Recycling Center sells much of its waste paper through brokers to markets in
Oklahoma, Kansas, Korea and Mexico. Dennis Paper Sales sells paper primarily to domestic mills
such as Durbin Paper Stock, Stone Container, Kimberly Clark, and others. Glass cullet from both
processing centers is sold to Liberty Glass in Oklahoma, 450 miles from Lincoln. Aluminum from Dennis
Paper Sales is sold to smelting plants such as Golden Aluminum in Fort Lipton, Colorado, and Alcoa in
Indiana. Scrap metal from Nebraska Recycling Center is sold in Kansas.
Lincoln began collecting white goods in October 1990. From October to December of that year, 34 tons
of white goods were collected and given to a Lincoln scrap metal dealer. Much of this metal went to a
small steel mill in Norfolk, Nebraska.
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement
Lincoln is working with the Cooperative Extension Service and telephone companies to develop
local and regional markets for waste paper products, such as the use of waste paper for animal bedding
and for insulation. The City is planning to purchase benches made from plastic milk jugs collected in
the City of Lincoln. The Lincoln Journal, the City's newspaper, is published on 60 percent post-consumer
recycled newsprint, using an estimated 100 tons of old newsprint each month. Lincoln's Mayor signed an
executive order in July 1990 requiring City departments to purchase recycled paper. The State of
Nebraska requires its departments to procure recycled paper in accordance with EPA procurement
standards.
Composting Activities
A composting demonstration project began in Lincoln in the summer of 1988, when the Recycling
Office initiated a pilot project for the curbside collection of yard waste. As of October 1990, residents
and landscapers could drop off brush and other yard waste at the transfer station for $4 per pick-up
load. Branches and yard waste are ground and composted. Christmas trees can be dropped off at eight
sites throughout the City during the 4 weeks following Christmas. The trees are ground into mulch,
which is available to residents free of charge at the old landfill. In 1990, 372 tons of yard waste were
collected through the municipal curbside program; 1,835 tons of yard waste were collected at the
transfer station; and 95 tons of Christmas trees were collected and mulched. A comprehensive solid-
waste management plan now being prepared may ban yard waste from the landfill as of 1993.
Page 55
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
Curbside Collection
Start-up Date:
Service Provider:
Households Served:
Materials Collected:
Mandatory:
Set-out Method:
Collection Vehicle and
Method:
Collection Frequency:
Economic Incentives:
Annual Tonnage:
Pilot began June 1988.
Niederhaus Brothers, Palmers & Sons, Inc. and D&D Refuse under
contract with the City
2,000
Leaves, grass clippings, and brush
No
Materials are placed in 90-gallon toters supplied by the haulers. The
City pays the haulers a $2 per month fee for each household in the pilot
program to cover rental of these bins.
One-person crews collect yard waste using 20- to 25-cubic-yard packer
trucks.
Weekly from ; through November in 1990
The City doc aot charge participants in the pilot project for the
collection of yard waste.
372 tons in 1990
Composting Site
The compost facility is located on the 8-acre site of the old landfill. The composting demonstration
project occupies approximately 4 of the 8 acres. Leaves and grass clippings from the pilot curbside
program and from commercial lawn businesses are ground, placed in windrows, and turned weekly with
a front-end loader. The windrows are watered once in the fall. Finished compost is not sold, but is used
as a soil amendment to help close the old landfill. Brush collected at the transfer station is ground
with a tub grinder into mulch. The mulch is sold to landscapers for $8 per cubic yard, or $3 per cubic
yard if 100 or more cubic yards are purchased.
Christmas treesare collected at eight drop-off sites throughout the City. Trees are chipped on site
by four crews, one each from the Parks and Recreation Department, Public Works, the University of
Nebraska, and the Lincoln Electric System. The Parks and Recreation Department is responsible for
setting up the sites, and the Recycling Office publicizes the drop-off program. The estimated 1990 cost
to the City was $5300, with another $5,000 in in-kind services contributed by the private sector.
Page 56
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
Material
Newspaper
Corrugated Cardboard
High-grade Paper
Other Paper
Glass
PET Plastic
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous Cans
Appliances/White Goods*
Other Metal
Motor Oil
Subtotal MSW Recycled
Leaves, Grass CGppings & Brush
Tree Trimmings
Christmas Trees
Subtotal MSW Composted*
Total MSW Recovered
Asphalt and Concrete
Total C&D Recovered
Total Materials Recycled
Total Materials Composted
Total Materials Recovered
Residential
(Tons, 1990)
2,356
-
-
-
400
27
836
51
34
377
_
4,081
372
-
95
467
4,548
—
-
4,081
467
4,548
Commercial/
Institutional
(Tons, 1990)
262
6,562
4,252
8,925
-
-
278
-
-
240
508
21,027
-
-
-
-
21,027
—
—
21,027
0
21,027
Other
(Tons, 1990)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
1,074
761
-
1,835
1,835
193,167
193,167
193,167
1,835
195,002
Total
(Tons, 1990)
2,618
6,562
4,252
8,925
400
27
1,114
51
34
617
508
25,108
1,446
761
95
2,302
27,410
193,167
193,167
218,275
2,302
220,577
Note: Tonnages of recyclabJes are extrapolated from 1990 Lancaster County tonnage data and represent amounts of materials
collected. The Lincoln Office of Recycling estimates that 85 percent of the recyclabtes recovered in Lancaster County are from the
City of Lincoln. Actual tonnages may exceed listed amounts.
•The tonnage of white goods recovered h 1990 (34 tons) was estimated based on 102 tons collected at the transfer station between
October 1990 and June 1991.
^Total MSW composted includes 1,835 tons of yard waste and landscapes' waste that were self-hauled to the transfer station. Of
these, the City Parks and Recreation Department collected and chipped 1,074 tons of brush and tree trimmings. This tonnage
cannot be broken down by residential and commercial sectors.
Page57
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
Source Reduction Initiatives
A b Jiure advising consumers to shop wisely by buying in bulk, purchasing recycled products, and
purchasing products packaged with recyclable materials is part of the City's publicity and education
campaign. Representatives of the City Health Department offer technical assistance to businesses in
performing waste assessments and developing alternatives to waste disposal.
Publicity and Education
The City's "Give Trash A Second Chance" campaign, initiated in 1989, includes a 15-minute video,
brochures, and posters to encourage residential and commercial waste reduction through reuse and
recycling. The Recycling Office published a "Handbook for Commercial Waste Reduction" to help
explain how offices, restaurants, and other businesses can separate their waste for recycling and reduce
their waste stream. Posters are provided by the Recycling Office to businesses that initiate in-house
recycling programs.
The Recycling Office publishes a newsletter, "Eco-Linc: A Guide to Conserving Resources in Lincoln
and Lancaster County," which features articles on office paper recycling programs and recycled product
procurement. The Center for Infrastructure Research and the Department of Civil Engineering at the
University of Nebraska conducted in-depth waste audits for ten local businesses in conjunction with the
Recycling Office. These businesses served as case studies for similar businesses. The finished report
details how to set up an effective pollution prevention program and offers tips on conducting a waste
assessment
In 1991 the Recycling Office published a brochure for Lincoln residents on backyard composting and
distributed leaflets on The Magic of Mulch" to area garden centers for display. The front of the leaflet
listed the benefits of mulch and wood chips as a soil amendment, and the back listed summer water
conservation tips. The Recycling Office produced a small map detailing Christmas tree drop-off
locations. Christmas tree vendors made these maps available to residents when they purchased a
Christmas tree.
Economics
Costs Coven In 1990, 30 tons of recyclable materials and 372 tons of organic waste were
collected through the pilot residential curbside program. An estimated 3,964
tons of recyclable materials were collected through drop-off sites. In
addition, 1,835 tons of yard waste, brush, and tree trimmings and 95 tons of
Christmas trees were collected at the transfer station and at Christmas tree
drop-off points.
Most of the capital costs for the municipal curbside program are incurred by
the private sector. However, the City did pay for comstarch bags for the
collection of recyclables and paper bags for the collection of yard waste.
These costs are included below. Of the recyclable materials collected through
drop-off centers, approximately 3,574 tons were collected through sites
operated by CEI and tor-profit businesses. Capital costs for the collection and
processing of these tonnages are incurred by the private sector and are not
available. The City took over the operation of CEI's newspaper drop-off
Page 58
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
Costs Cover (confd):
sites as of October 1990, and collected 390 tons of newspaper between October
and December; costs for this operation are listed below.
The City has not incurred any capital costs for the collection of yard waste,
since collection is provided by private haulers under contract. The City's
capital costs to compost or chip 2,302 tons of organic waste in 1990 are given
below.
Operating and maintenance costs incurred by the City in 1990 include contract
fees for the collection and processing of 420 tons of recyclable materials (30
tons from the municipal curbside program and 390 tons through drop-off) and
372 tons of yard waste collected at curbside, City labor and vehicle
maintenance costs for the collection and processing of 2302 tons of organic
waste, and administrative, education, and publicity costs.
Capital Costs: Collection
Item
18,000 Comstarch Bags
8,840 Paper Bags
10 EWI Hvestar Roll-off Bins
Cost
$2,500
3,700
56,940
Use
Recycling
Composting
Recycling/DO
Year Incurred
1990
1990
1991
Note: All equipment is paid out of cash reserves from landfill revenues.
Capital Costs: Processing
Cost
Use
Year Incurred
Chipper
Front-end Loader (10% of time)
$76,000
63,600
Composting
Composting
1987
1990
Note: All equipment is paid out of cash reserves from landfill revenues.
Page 59
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
Annual and Per Ton Operating and Maintenance Costs (1990)
Cost
Recycling Subtotal $57,070
Collection $10.787
Curbside Collection* 1.000
Drop-Off Collection t 9,787
Processing 450
Administration 39.000
Education/Publicity 6.833
Composting Subtotal $81,949
Collection $32.956
Curbside Yard Waste Collection 11.966
Transfer Station Collection 20,990
Christmas Tree Collection 0
Processing 32,260
Yard Waste Processing 26.760
Christmas Tree Processing 5,500
Administration 15,000
Education/Publicity 1,733
Recycling & Composting Total $139,019
Collection $43,743
Processing 32,710
Administration 54,000
Education/Publicity 8,566
Tons Covered Per Ton Cost
454
454
30
424
30
454
454
2,302
2,302
372
1,835
95
2,302
2.207
95
2,302
2,302
2,722
2.722
2,722
2,722
2,722
$126
$24
33
23
15
86
15
$36
$14
32
11
0
14
12
58
7
1
$50
$16
14
20
3
• Curbside collection of recyclable materials cost the City $1,000; this includes $500 paid to Palmer & Sons Refuse and Niedernaus
Brothers to retrofit existing vehicles.
t Includes the cost ($3,944) for collecting and processing 34 tons of white goods serf-hauled to the transfer station.
The City's curbside recycling collection costs include $500 paid to haulers to upgrade their vehicles.
Drop-off costs are $5,843 in payments to Dennis Paper Sales for providing containers, servicing the sites,
and processing and marketing the old newsprint. According to Lincoln's agreement with Dennis Paper
Sales, the City pays Dennis $14 per ton for processing the materials and $1 per month for providing bins
and servicing the sites.
The City paid $5,936 to three private haulers to collect 372 tons of yard waste. Two of the three
haulers contracted to collect yard waste chose to replace one of their two weekly refuse collection days
with yard waste collection. The City paid these haulers $8 per ton of yard waste collected, plus a
small additional fee based on a non-participation formula; the low level of participation in the
voluntary pilot program increased the haulers' actual per ton costs. The third hauler added an extra
yard waste collection route to his two weekly refuse days. As a result, his overall costs were higher
(than the other two haulers) and the City paid him $28 per ton of yard waste collected. In addition,
Lincoln paid haulers $6,030 for monthly cart rental for 603 households over a 5-month period ($2 per
month, per household, rental fee). Transfer station collection consists of 761 tons of leaves, grass
dippings, and branches dropped off by landscapes, and 1,074 tons of wood waste including stumps, logs,
and branches dropped-off by the Parks Department and arborists. Yard waste processing includes tub
grinder rental at $175 per hour for 8 hours per day, 3 days per month, 6 months per year ($25,200) and
Page 60
-------
Lincoln, Nebraska
labor costs for one laborer at the transfer station at $750 per hour for 208 hours per year ($1560).
Christmas trees are self-hauled to drop-off sites that are not staffed; thus, no cost for collection was
incurred by the City. In addition to the $5,500 Christmas tree chipping cost paid by the City, the
private sector provided $5,000. Administrative costs for the yard waste program include a $60 per
week record-keeping fee paid to each hauler for 5 months (from July through November 1990), totalling
$1,200, plus an estimated 30 percent of the administrator's time spent on this program, totalling $4500.
Materials Revenues: $2,988 from the sale of wood chips. All other revenues are retained by
.the private sector.
Source of Funding: Landfill gate fees of $35 per ton for fiscal year 1990
Full-time Employees: 1 City employee
Part-time Employees: 2 City employees (1 support staff, 1 student intern)
Future Solid Waste Management Plans
The City completed a comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan in late 1991, which was
approved by the City Council in March 1992. The Plan included banning yard waste, and the City will
require haulers (as part of their license agreement) to collect source separated yard waste for
composting. The City's ban on land filling yard waste commences in October 1992. The City is trying to
encourage haulers to replace one of the two weekly refuse collection days with yard waste collection. It
has updated a City law that formerly required all rental units to receive twice per week refuse
collection. Now only buildings with more than four units must receive twice per week collection. At
this time the City does not have plans to expand the curbside recycling program due to limited markets
and the high capital and operating costs of a citywide program. In March 1992, the Teresa Street
Wastewater Treatment Plant will begin to anaerobically digest sludge, and the finished waste will be
used at the compost facility or in land application projects.
In the winter of 1991, the City received a $4,100 grant from the Nebraska Litter Reduction and
Recycling Fund to develop a recycled plastics demonstration project. Plastic gallon milk jugs will be
collected and shipped to a regional recycling plant that will make picnic tables and park benches and
resell them to Lincoln.
Contact
GeneHanlon
Recycling Coordinator
Recycling Division of the Mayor's Office
555 South 10th Street
Lincoln, NE 68508
Phone (402) 471-7043
Fax (402) 471-7734
Page 61
-------
Lincoln, rtska
Page 62
-------
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Mecklenburg County,
North Carolina
Demographics
Jurisdiction: Mecklenburg County
Population:
Area:
Total Households:
Total Businesses and
Institutions:
Brief Description:
511,433 in 1990
543 square miles
216,416 (135,677 in one- and two-family residences, 72,875 in buildings of
three units or more, and 7364 in mobile homes)
17,303
Mecklenburg County, located in southern North Carolina, is experiencing
rapid growth; its population has increased 30 percent during the last
decade. There are seven municipalities in the County. The principal
city, Charlotte, has a population of 418,000, nearly 82 percent of the
County's population. The County is the sixth largest wholesale
distribution center in the nation and is also a major southeastern finance
center. Other major employers include IBM, the utility company Duke
Power, and Lance, a wholesale distributor of baked goods. The County's
median per capita income in 1990 was $14,470. Median household income
was $27,656.
Page 63
-------
Meddenburg County, North Carftna
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
Annual Tonnages (1990)
Recovered
Recycledt
Composted
Disposed
Incinerated*
Landfilled§
Generated
Residential
20,171
20,171
NA
272,726
74,956
197,770
292,897
Commercial/
Institutional
92,521
92,521
NA
333,158
0
333,158
425,679
Other*
1,176
0
1,176
-
1,176
Total
MSW
113,868
112,692
1,176
605,884
74,956
530,928
719,752
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
Percent by Weight Recovered
7%
7%
NA
22%
22%
NA
16%
16%
Note: Municipal waste generated includes bulky items and tires. Tonnages for construction and demolition debris (C&D), which is
disposed in more than 600 private landfills, are not available.
'Because of the 1989 Hurricane 'Hugo,* the County mulched an extremely large volume of yard waste in late 1989 and 1990. These
tonnages, estimated at greater than 109,000 tons for Charlotte alone, do not reflect the County's yard waste tonnages mulched
during a typical calendar year; thus, tonnages of yard waste dropped off by both bndscapers and residents presented above were
extrapolated from 7 months of 1988 and early 1989 data. Although a curbside yard waste program was initiated in January 1991,
the program reflects activities that did not occur during 1990; thus, these tonnages are not included in the above table. The County
recovered 15,881 tons of yard waste (31,762 tons for a calendar year) during the first 6 months of 1991 through its curbside and
drop-off programs. If this residential yard waste tonnage replaced that reported above and residential MSW remained the same,
then residential MSW recycled would equal 7%; residential MSW composted, 11%; and residential MSW recovered, 18%.
TA small fraction (less than 4 percent) of the 20,171 tons of recydables attributed to residential recovery is actually commercial
waste collected at County drop-off sites.
$Waste incinerated includes 40 tons of oil burned as a fuel source.
§Waste landfilled includes 102 tons of tires.
"Less than 1 percent
Landfill /Incinerator
Tipping Fee:
Refuse Collection and
Disposal:
$23.00 in 1988, $2450 in 1989, $26.00 in 1990, $2950 in 1991. (Incinerator
and landfill tipping fees are identical.)
Municipalities are responsible for their waste collection services. The
municipalities of Charlotte, Cornelius, Huntersville, and Pineville
collect residential refuse. Davidson, Matthews, and iint Hill contract
with private haulers for residential waste collection. Defuse collection is
not provided for residents in unincorporated areas, who must haul refuse
to the Harrisburg Road Landfill. Many private haulers collect refuse
from commercial establishments; the three primary haulers of
commercial waste are BFI, Waste Management Inc., and Container
Corporation of Carolina. Mecklenburg County oversees County waste
disposal. Until mid-1985, the County operated three landfills. Two of
Page 64
-------
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Total MSW Recovered and Disposed (Percent by Weight, 1990)
Disposed 84% Recovered 16%
Residential Disposed38%,
Residential Recycled 3%
:j£ Comm/lnst Recycled 13%
Comm/lnst Disposed 46%
Note: Landscapes' Waste is less than 1%
Refuse Collection and these were dosed in 1986. In 1987 the only County landfill still operating,
Disposal (cont'd): the Harrisburg Road Landfill, received a permit for an extension until the
end of 1991. A County-owned and privately operated (M.K. Ferguson)
indnerator was opened in June 1989. It was built at a cost of $275 million
and designed to incinerate 235 tons per day. In 1990,12 percent of County
municipal solid waste disposed was incinerated, approximately 50
percent was disposed at BFI's Speedway Landfill in neighboring
Cabarras County, and 37 percent was disposed at the Harrisburg Road
Landfill. When the County landfill doses, refuse will be disposed at the
Speedway Landfill and the indnerator until the County receives a permit
to build another landfill.
Construction and demolition (C&D) debris is disposed at over 20 private
C&D landfills throughout the County and at over 600 small demolition
landfills on construction sites. Some asphalt is privately recovered;
however, tonnages are not tracked.
Residents in Charlotte receive refuse collection twice a week. In 1990 the
City of Charlotte disposed of 148,867 tons of refuse at a cost of $10,153,729
($68 per ton). This cost does not include the tipping fee because the
County issues Charlotte a tonnage credit, which was not exceeded in 1990.
Page 65
-------
Mectdenburg County, North Carlina
Materials Recovery Overview
Goals and Legislative North Carolina State Bill 111, passed in 1989, required counties to
Requirements; develop recycling plans by July 1991 and set a goal of recycling 25 percent
of the State's waste stream by 1993. The State banned the disposal of
white goods, lead-add batteries, motor oil, whole tires, and waste in
lined landfills.
ons
In 1985 Mecklenburg County developed a Solid Waste Master Plan that
set a goal of recycling 30 percent, incinerating 40 percent, and landfiHing
30 percent of the County's waste stream by 2006. By 1994 the County plans
to recycje \5 percent of its waste stream.
•s,. str
In 1975 the Mecklenburg Citizens Committee for Recycling urged the County Board of Supervisors to
set up recycling drop-off centers at several Charlotte high schools. The County allocated $17,000 to set
up the drop-off centers, and established a recycling center at the Harrisburg Road Landfill in 1980. In
1987 the County set up a program at the landfill to recover loads of corrugated cardboard headed for
disposal. Salvage of white goods and other metals was added later.
In February 1987, the County's first curbside program, serving 2,400 single-family homes, was
implemented in the City of Charlotte. The City collected glass, aluminum and ferrous cans, newspaper,
and PET plastic containers. These recycled materials were processed at an interim County-operated
processing center. In June 1987, Charlotte began collecting recyclable materials at curbside from 12,000
households in the cities of Davidson, Huntersville, and Cornelius. By 1990, 106,000 single- through
three-family residences were served countywide. As of the summer of 1991, all seven municipalities in
the County have curbside recycling programs.
In December 1989, the County contracted with FCR Inc. (Fairfield County Recycling), a private
Connecticut-based company, to process and market all materials collected through the curbside
programs and County drop-off sites, in a new facility in Charlotte, called FCR/Charlotte. In 1990 the
County paid FCR/Charlotte a $750 per ton tipping fee (totalling $140,000 for the year) for all
materials collected at drop-off and curbside. The fee arrangement changed in 1991. FCR/Charlotte
now keeps all revenues and no longer charges the County a tipping fee.
Residents not served with curbside collection can bring their recyclable materials to one of the 16
County-owned drop-off sites. The largest site is located at the Harrisburg Road Landfill, where
residents are not required to pay a refuse disposal tipping fee if they bring three or more bags of
recyclable materials in addition to their refuse. Private haulers also avoid the tipping fee if half
their load contains materials to be recycled. Landfill and incinerator tipping fees support the County's
incinerator, landfill, and recycling programs. The County continues to focus its efforts on collecting
recyclable materials through County-sponsored drop-off sites. Municipalities are responsible for
initiating curbside collection programs. The City of Charlotte initiated and operates curbside recycling
programs in four of the seven municipalities. The City charges the communities a fee of $0.28 per
household per week for pick-up, and brings recydables to the County processing center.
Page 66
-------
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Recycling Activities
Residential Curbside Recycling
Start-up Date:
Service Provider:
Pick-up Frequency:
Same Day as Refuse:
Households Served:
Mandatory:
Participation Rate:
Materials Collected:
Set-out Method:
Collection Method and
Vehicles:
Economic Incentives:
Enforcement:
Annual Tonnage
February 1987 in the City of Charlotte, June 1987 in Davidson,
Huntersville, and Cornelius, and January 1990 in Mint Hill
The City of Charlotte's Department of Public Works collects recyclable
materials in Charlotte, Davidson, Huntersville, and Cornelius.
Residential Collection Service (RCS), a private company in Mint Hill,
provides curbside service in that dry. In spring 1991, BFI began collecting
recydables in Matthews. A private hauler will begin servicing Pineville
in the summer of 1991.
Weekly. White goods are picked up in Charlotte free of charge on
request.
Yes
A total of 106,000 residences in the cities of Charlotte, Davidson,
Huntersville, and Cornelius in 1990, primarily in one- through three-
family homes, but also including one 200-unit garden apartment
retirement complex in Davidson. When Charlotte's boundaries were
extended in June 1991, 7,000 residences were added to the curbside
program. A private hauler serves 4,000 households in Mint Hill.
No
85 percent (based on participation surveys conducted in Charlotte in 1990)
Newspaper, glass, aluminum and ferrous cans, and PET plastic containers
are collected through all curbside programs. White goods are collected by
special request in Charlotte. HOPE plastic containers were added to all
programs in January 1991.
Residents place commingled glass, aluminum and ferrous cans, and PET
plastic containers in a 14-gallon bin and set newspaper in paper bags on
top of the bins. Charlotte supplies bins to residents in the four
communities it services. Residents at the retirement community bring
their 14-gallon bins to a centralized location for collection. Residents in
Mint Hill and Matthews are also supplied with bins.
A one-person crew places glass and aluminum and ferrous cans in one bin,
newspaper in another, and plastics in a cage on the side of a Lodal
recycling truck.
None
Not applicable
17,356 tons in 1990 (15,932 tons through Charlotte's curbside programs, 536
tons through Mint Hill's program, and 888 tons of white goods)
Page 67
-------
Mecldenburg County, NorthhQtrlina
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling
Legislative None
Requirements:
Service Provider:
Number Served:
Type Served:
Materials Collected:
Pick-up Frequency:
Set-out and
Collection Method:
Incentives:
Annual Tonnage:
Public Collection
Mecldenburg County
7 buildings
County office buildings
High-grade paper
Weekly
Employees place paper in desktop
bins, which are emptied into
centrally located rolling mail carts.
County employees collect the paper
and bring it directly to local brokers.
None
92 tons in 1990
Private Collection
BFI collected materials in 1990.
Container Corporation of Carolina
began a corrugated cardboard
collection program in January 1991.
Approximately 10 businesses in 1990.
As of 1991, BFI collects cardboard
from 160 businesses.
Convenience and retail stores,
restaurants
Corrugated cardboard
Collection frequency varied in 1990.
As of 1991, BFI collects cardboard
weekly.
In 1990 BFI provided 30-cubic-yard
compactors to businesses. As of 1991,
BFI charges businesses various rates
depending on the size of the
container, the frequency of collection,
and whether the corrugated
cardboard is compacted.
None
Not available
Although private haulers can deliver recyclables to FCR/Charlotte, a number of businesses drop off
recyclables at the 16 county-operated drop-off sites. These tonnages cannot be broken out and are
included with residential recyclables recovered.
BFI processes the cardboard in its privately owned and operated IPC in neighboring Cabarras
County. In fall 1991, BFI will begin a pilot glass, aluminum can, and plastic program for restaurants and
bars. For a fee, BFI will distribute a 64-gallon roll-out container to each business and customers will be
required to sort materials, including sorting glass by color.
In March 1991, representatives from all 117 County public schools participated in a school board
meeting to initiate recycling programs in County schools. Approximately 11 schools began to recycle
high-grade paper and aluminum cans as a fundraising activity. These schools are responsible for
marketing their own materials. During the 1991-92 school year, 30 additional schools will initiate
recycling programs. Although vendors do not collect materials at individual schools, they have
proposed to pick up materials brought to centrally located schools.
Page 68
-------
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Drop-off Centers
Number and Type 37 (16 County-operated drop-off centers, 18 private buy-back centers, and
3 private drop-off centers.
Public or Private: Public and private
Sectors Served: Residential and commercial
Materials Accepted: Newspaper, kraft paper bags, glass, aluminum cans, ferrous cans, and
HOPE and PET plastic containers are accepted at County drop-off sites.
Corrugated cardboard, lead-acid batteries, tires and motor oil are
accepted at two sites, and scrap metal is accepted at the Harrisburg
Landfill only. In addition to the materials listed above, private buy-
back centers purchase or accept high-grade and mixed paper (including
magazines and telephone books), polypropylene, PET, and PVC scrap
plastics.
Annual Tonnage: 3,568 tons from County drop-off sites in 1990 (2,142 tons of glass, aluminum
and ferrous cans, newspaper and plastic, 592 tons of white goods, 250 tons
of cardboard, 502 tons of scrap metal, 40 tons of motor oil, 25 tons of lead-
acid batteries, and 17 tons of tires). Private drop-off tonnages are not
available.
The County places two types of containers for recyclables at drop-off centers. Residents set
newspaper in 1-cubic-yard boxes and commingled materials in 8-cubic-yard slant top boxes. At several
drop-off sites, roll-off containers or 20-cubic-yard containers are provided for white goods. Two of the
sites are staffed. Eight are located at public schools, two at apartment buildings, and one at a
restaurant The County encourages businesses to use the drop-off sites. Businesses can thus avoid paying
not only refuse tipping fees, but also the $7.50 per ton recycling tipping fee at the FCR/Charlotte
processing center.
Salvage/Reuse
The County salvages materials headed for disposal at the Harrisburg Road Landfill, including
corrugated cardboard, white goods, scrap metal, radiators, clean aluminum scrap, brass, and copper.
Landfill operators direct haulers with large loads of recoverable material to designated areas at the
landfill. Haulers can avoid the $29.50 landfill tipping fee if their loads contain more than half
recyclable materials. In 1990 the County recovered 1,344 tons at the Harrisburg Road Landfill.
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables
All recycled materials collected at County drop-off sites and through the Charlotte, Davidson,
Cornelius, Huntersville, and Mint Hill curbside programs are brought to the FCR/Charlotte
intermediate processing center (IPC) opened in December 1989. Private haulers and businesses can also
bring recyclables to the center. The IPC is owned and operated by FCR Inc., a private firm based in
Stratford, Connecticut, and staffed by 26 full-time employees. The renovated building for the IPC,
which FCR leases, contains 26,000 square feet for processing and 7,000 square feet for administrative
activities. The facility, designed to process 200 tons per day, processes an average of 80 tons per day.
Page 69
-------
Mecklenburg County, North Carliiuf
operating a single shift. FCR/Charlotte built an amphitheater within the facility for group tours and
presentations, and allows visitors to view the recycling separation process through a large window.
Capital costs for equipment, incurred in 1989, totalled $700,000. In 1990 the County paid
FCR/Gharlotte a $7.50 per ton tipping fee to process 18,610 tons collected at County drop-off sites and
throngh Charlotte's and Mint Hill's curbside programs; the total came to $140,000. Revenues from
recycled materials in excess of $410,000 were split between contractor and operator. The County
retained 75 percent and FCR/Charlotte kept 25 percent. In 1991 Mecklenburg County altered the
contract It no longer pays a tipping fee at the processing center, and FCR/Charlotte keeps all revenues.
This change helped FCR to stay in business after market prices dropped, and enabled the County to
take all its recydables to the facility for free.
Processing is labor-intensive; 22 employees hand-sort glass by color and separate aluminum cans,
ferrous cans, and HOPE and PET plastic containers on three conveyor belts. Corrugated cardboard,
newspaper, and kraft paper bags are sorted and baled. Seven percent by weight of the recyclable
materials brought to the IPC are either rejected at the door or broken during processing. Most of the
rejected materials are landfilled, except for broken glass, which is used as a landfill cover.
FCR/Charlotte sells aluminum cans, corrugated cardboard, kraft paper bags, and white and brown
glass out of state. Green glass is marketed in state. Ferrous cans and HOPE and PET plastics are sold
both in North Carolina and elsewhere. Mecklenburg County bales corrugated cardboard collected at its
drop-off sites and sells it to Sonoco, a local container manufacturer. High-grade paper from County
offices is sold to three local brokers.
White goods are taken to the Harrisburg Road Landfill, disassembled, bundled as scrap metal, and
sold to a scrap dealer in South Carolina. Batteries are recycled at Gassic Batteries in Charlotte. Tires
collected through dealers and at the Harrisburg Road Landfill are sent to U.S. Tire Disposal, and
either shredded and disposed of in a monofill or processed and sold as retreads, boots, or liners. Motor
oil is re-refined as a lubricant or used as a fuel source.
In winter 1991, BFI opened an IPC in neighboring Cabanas County to process materials collected
through its curbside and commercial programs.
Composting Activities
Since 1983 the County has processed and sold leaves, grass dippings, small brush, and other yard
waste dropped off by residents and landscapers at the County landfill. The finished product, "Metro
Mulch," is sold to the public, and is used by City and County departments as a soil amendment. In fiscal
year 1989, the County mulched 1,176 tons of yard waste. The County mulched a disproportionately
large amount of brush and yard waste in 1990 because of damage caused by the 1989 hurricane "Hugo."
In Charlotte alone, more than 109,000 tons of such waste were estimated mulched.
Mulch sells for $6 per cubic yard and compost sells for $10 per cubic yard. If 5 or more cubic yards
are purchased, the mulch costs only $4 per cubic yard. In 1990 the County began to mulch Christmas
trees,.
In January 1991, the City of Charlotte implemented a weekly year-round yard waste collection
program. It started by collecting Christmas trees (previously all trees had been landfilled), and
followed with weekly collection of loose or clear plastic-bagged leaves, grass clippings, brush, and
wood waste. Two-person crews picked up these materials in compactor trucks. During the first 6 months
of 1991, the County composted 2,829 tons dropped off at the site by residents and 13,052 tons collected
through Charlotte's curbside program. The County expects to compost 35,000 tons by the end of the year.
The northern portion of Mecklenburg County, including the Towns of Cornelius and Davidson,
delivers yard waste materials to a County-owned and -operated 8-acre compost site. (Currently
Charlotte delivers yard waste collected through its curbside program to this site.) A new site,
"Compost Central," will open in November 1991 and will accept yard waste from Charlotte and the rest
Page 70
-------
Mecklenburg County, North Caroline
of the County, approximately 80 percent of County residents. At that time the mulching operation at
the Harrisburg Road Landfill will stop, and materials will be mulched at Compost Central. Less than
1 percent by weight of yard waste delivered to the site is rejected and disposed. Yard waste is
windrowed, turned, and cured. County residents can continue to drop off yard waste at the site for free.
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
Material
Newspaper
Corrugated Cardboard§
High-grade Paper
Mixed Paper**
Glass
PET Plastic
HOPE Plastic
Other Plastic
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous Cans
Appliances/White Goodstt
Metal Scrap
Tires**
Motor Oil§§
Batteries
Subtotal MSW Recycled
Yard Waste
Subtotal MSW Composted
Total MSW Recovered
Total C&D Recovered
Residential*
(Ton*, 1990)
15,469
47
0
0
2,270
443
47
NA
227
106
1,480
0
17
40
25
20,171
_
-
20,171
NA
Commercial/
Institutional
(Tons, 1990)
NA
90,000
1,247
2
NA
NA
NA
72
644
NA
NA
556
NA
NA
NA
92,521
_
-
92,521
NA
Other* Total
(Tons, FY 1989) (Tons, 1990)
15,469
90,047
1,247
2
2,270
443
47
72
871
106
1,480
556
17
40
25
112,692
1,176 1,176
1,176 1,176
1,176 113,868
NA NA
•Includes 15.932 tons collected through Charlotte's curbside programs, 536 tons collected through Mint Hill's program, and 2,142
tons of newspaper, glass, and cans accepted at Mecklenburg County drop-off sites. Drop-off center tonnages include some
commercial materials.
"f Includes 250 tons of cardboard and 502 tons of ferrous scrap collected at the Harrisburg Road Landfill and 92 tons of high grade
paper collected from municipal offices. Other materials are privately recovered.
^Because yard waste tonnages are not available for 1990, figures above listed under "other yard waste' represent leaves, grass
clippings, and brush recovered one year prior to Hurricane Hugo. Yard waste was accepted at (he Harrisburg Road Landfill from
residents, tendscapers, and private haulers. Yearly tonnage was extrapolated from compostabtes collected and weighed during a
7-month period. It is estimated that 1,176 tons were dropped off at the site in fiscal year 1989, based on an average of 98 tons per
month.
§Residential corrugated cardboard includes kraft paper bags.
"Commercial mixed paper includes telephone books.
1"f Includes some white goods from the commercial sector.
**This figure represents an estimated 14 percent of the 119.4 tons of tires collected in Mecklenburg County. These 17 tons were
recycled into retreads, boots, and liners. The remaining 102.4 tons were landfiUed in a monofill.
§§80 tons of motor oil were collected at County drop-off sites. Approximately 50 percent of this oil was re-refined and used as a
lubricant, and 50 percent was burned as a fuel source.
Page 71
-------
Mecklenburg County, North Carlina
Publicity and Education
Residential
In 1982 the County contracted out education and publicity programs to a private consulting firm.
Although some recycling publicity is still handled by consultants, the County currently develops and
coordinates most education and publicity programs. Program staff give tours of the County's recycling
centers, processing operation, and landfill, and mate presentations to school and community groups.
The County publishes a map of its drop-off locations with instructions for preparation of materials.
The local newspaper also prints a map identifying drop-off sites four times per year. The public
television station produced two one-half hour documentaries on Mecklenburg County's waste
management strategies. The County has sponsored three recycling conferences, and presents awards
each year to outstanding businesses, ,-iudents, and citizen recyclers. It also uses direct mail, doorknob
notices, and an informab,>nal pamphlet on residential recycling.
Commercial
The County mailed a', businesses a Tee off on Trash" recycling fact sheet; 160 businesses contacted
the recycling office to egress interest in setting up a program. The County sent these businesses
informational packages including a business recycling manual entitled, "The Possibilities and
Practicalities of Business Waste Recycling." In addition, County staff will perform waste audits for
local businesses and advise businesses on how to set up a recycling program.
Economics
Costs Coven
Drop-off Collection: Mecklenburg County paid capital and O&M collection
costs for 3,660 tons of materials recovered through its 16 drop-off sites and its
County office building collection program in 1990: 2,142 tons of newspaper,
glass, cans, and plastics, 592 tons of white goods (40 percent of the total tons of
white goods recovered in the County), 80 tons of oil (of the 80 tons collected,
approximately 50 percent were burned), 25 tons of batteries, 119 tons of tires
(of which 17 tons were recycled), 752 tons of scrap metal and cardboard, and 92
tons of high-grade paper (from County office buildings).
Processing: The County paid a contract fee to FCR/Charlotte for processing
15,932 tons of recyclable materials collected at curbside from Charlotte,
Davidson, Huntersville, and Cornelius, 536 tons from the town of Mint Hill,
and 2,142 tons from the 16 County-operated drop-off sites. (Capital costs for
processing recyclables are covered by FCR/Charlotte.)
The County also covered processing costs for 1,480 tons of white goods (592 tons
collected through County drop-off sites and 888 tons through Charlotte's
curbside program), 92 tons of high-grade paper, and 752 tons of scrap metal
and cardboard. Capital costs for mulch processing equipment, covered by the
County, are included below; however, operating and maintenance costs for the
1989 and 1990 mulching program are not available.
Other: Administrative, education, and publicity costs listed under operating
and maintenance costs below are County costs only.
Page 72
-------
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Capital Costs: Collection
Item
3 24-cubic-yard Front-end Loaders
@ $54,900, $65,900, $65,000 (90% of
Time)
2 Cube Vans with Rear Lift @ $7,530
2 Mack Roll-Offs @ $85,000 (75% of Time)
Truck
Trailer
Maintenance Service Truck*
2 Forklifts @ $24,000 & $12,000
281 -cubic-yard Boxes® $450
100,261 14-gallon Recycling Bins @ $3.46t
18 Lodal ECO 3,000 @ $68,995t
24-cubic-yand Rear Packer
5 20-cubic-yard Containers @ $2,000
7 8-cubic-yard Slant Top Boxes @ $630
13,500 14-Gallon Recycling Bins*
Cost
$185,800
15,060
170,000
20,000
5,000
42,000
36,000
12,600
346,903
1,241,910
Leased
10.000
4,410
46,710
Use
Recycling (DO)
Recycling
Recycling (DO)
Recycling
Recycling
RecycL/Composting
Recycling
Recycling (DO)
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling (DO)
Recycling (DO)
Recycling (DO)
Recycling
Year Incurred
1984, 1986,
1989
1985
1986
1988
1988
1988
1988 & 1989
1989
1989
1989
—
NA
1990
1990
'The maintenance service truck is used to service both recycling and composting equipment and vehicles.
^Purchased and paid for by the City of Charlotte. All other equipment was purchased by the County and paid in full.
Capital Costs: Processing
Item
2 Vertical Balers @ $15,000
Forklift
3 Conveyors*
3 Skid Steer Loaders*
2 Forklifts*
Balers*
Hoppers*
Pick-up Truck
Tub Grinder
2 Dump Trucks @ $27,000
Dump Truck
Bobcat Skid Steer Loader
Tractor Loader
Cost
$30,000
18,000
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9,000
99,000
54,000
60,000
18,000
17,000
Use
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Year Incurred
1980, 1985
1987
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1979
1983
1985 & 1990
1987
1987
1988
Page 73
-------
M-ckfaiburg County, North Carlina
Capital Costs; Processing (cont'd)
Item
Scarab Windrow Turner
W.H.O. Tub Grinder
R.I.S. Tub Grinder
Stomas Low Speed Shredder
Dump Truck
2 3-cubic-yard Wheel Loaders
@ $79,000 & $89,000
2 Conveyors
Tractor Loader
Trommel Screen iSS
ime _
der Cost
$125,984
156,710
151,146
457,865
26,000
168,000
41,000
21,000
',- 108,000
Use
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Year Incurred
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989 & 1990
1991
1991
1991
Note: All County equipment has been paid in full. The County purchased most of the composting equipment to process materials
discarded as a result of Hurricane Hugo.
'Equipment purchased and owned by FCR/Chariotte. Costs incurred m 1989 for this processing equipment totalled approximately
$700,000.
Annual and Per Ton Operating and Maintenance Costs (1990)
County Recycling Total
Subtotal Collection & Processing*
County Collection and Processing
Processing(FCR/Charlotte)t
Administration
Education/Publicity
Cost
$895,249
$626,636
$486,636
140,000
181,613
87,000
Tons Covered Per Ton Cost
21,158
21,158
NA
18,610
21,158
21,158
$42
$30
NA
7.50
9
4
Mores: Charlotte's curbside collection costs are not included in the above table. In 1990 the City curbside collection cost for 15,932
tons of newspaper, glass, cans, and plastic was $1,533,311 ($96 per ton). This figure is based on 6-month cost data. In addition,
Charlotte covers education, publicity, and administrative costs for Us programs. The cost of Mint Hil's collection program is not
available.
1990 County labor costs totalled $520,524. Charlotte pays collection personnel an average of $9.74 per hour.
Operating and maintenance costs for yard waste collected during fiscal year 1989 and costs to dean up and mulch debris caused
from Hurricane Hugo in 1989 and 1990 are not available.
In 1990 the County covered the cost of collecting 2,142 tons of commingled recyclables through its 16 drop-off sites and the
collection and processing at the Harrisburg Road Landfill of 592 tons of white goods, 250 tons of cardboard, 502 tons of scrap
metal, 92 tons of high-grade paper, 80 tons of oil, 25 tons of batteries, and 119 tons of tires. In addition, the County paid for the
processing of 888 tons of white goods and 15,932 tons of commingled recyclables collected at curbside from the City of Charlotte,
and 536 tons of curbside recyclables collected from Mint Hill.
"tMecklenburg County covers the processing costs for newspaper, glass, cans, and plastic collected through Charlotte's program
(15,932 tons), Mint Hill's program (536 tons), and through its 16 drop-off sites (2,142 tons) in the form of a tipping fee paid to the
FCR Charlotte facility.
Page 74
-------
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Materials Revenues:
Source of Funding:
Full-time Employees:
Part-time Employees:
$769,740 total revenue in 1990. FCR/Charlotte generated $693,000 in
revenues from the sale of recycled materials. Of this, the County
received $215,000. The County also earned $64,740 from the sale of
recyclable materials it marketed elsewhere (including batteries,
corrugated cardboard, foam rubber, white goods, and scrap metal). It
received $12,000 from its "Metro Mulch" program in 1990. Charlotte does
not receive any revenue from its composting or recycling programs.
Landfill and incinerator tipping fees support County solid waste
management and recycling programs. City taxes fund Charlotte's
programs.
84 (6 County employees administer recycling programs and education and
publicity programs, 16 work at County recycling drop-offs and with the
landfill diversion program, and 12 supervise or operate yard waste
processing; FCR/Charlotte employs 26 people; and 24 employees of the
City of Charlotte collect recyclables at curbside.)
9 (collecting recyclables at curbside for Charlotte's programs)
Future Solid Waste Management Flans
Mecklenburg County currently uses recycled paper on a voluntary basis in all County offices. The
County is testing recycled paper and reusable products to be included in a countywide procurement
policy. The 1992 Mecklenburg County telephone directory will include a one-page listing of County
recycling information numbers. Mecklenburg County plans to institute only one household hazardous
waste program in 1992; although the County recommends a permanent drop-off site, household
hazardous waste will be collected only once in Spring of 1992. Mecklenburg County and the City of
Charlotte plan to increase the number of multi-unit buildings served with curbside collection; however,
six additional apartment buildings will not be serviced until the next fiscal year or July 1992. In
September 1991, Charlotte will add curbside collection of spiral paper cans "composite cans" (such as
frozen juice cans) for recycling and will sell the cans to Sonoco, a local container manufacturer located in
Hartsville, South Carolina.
Mecklenburg County plans to open a commercial recycling facility in 1993, and will send out requests
for proposals (RFP's) in October 1991. The County has already sent out RFFs for construction of a second
600-ton-per-day incinerator, planned for 1996. It is also seeking a permit to construct a new landfill.
Contacts
Bill Warren
Division Manager, Recycling
Mecklenburg County Engineering Department
700 N. Tyron Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Phone (704) 336-3873
Fax (704) 336-3846
Wayman Pearson
Director
Solid Waste Services Dept., C.M.G.C.
600 East 4th Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Phone (704) 336-3410
Fax (704) 336-3497
Page 75
-------
Mcddenburg County, North Carliiu
Paul O'Donnell
Facility Operations Manager
FCR/Charlotte
300 Dalton Ave.
Charlotte, NC 28206
Phone (704) 358-9875
References
demons, Cindy (Resource Recovery Specialist, Mecklenburg County). Personal communication, October
1991.
Gibson, John (Environmental Protection, Charlotte, N.C.). Personal communication, July 1991.
McEntee, Ken. "Charlotte Waste Planners Pulling out all the Stops." Recycling Today, September
1989.
Saul, Gary (Deputy Director of Engineering, Mecklenburg County). Personal communication, July 1991.
"State of Garbage in America," Biocycle, May 1991.
Page 76
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Newark,
New Jersey
Demographics
Jurisdiction:
Population:
Area:
Total Households:
Total Businesses and
Institutions:
Brief Description:
City of Newark
275,221 in 1990
24 square miles
102,473 (13,475 single-family residences, 87,011 households in multi-unit
buildings—-43,398 in buildings with 2 to 4 units; 25,738 in buildings with 5
to 49 units; 17,875 in buildings with 50 or more units—and 1,987
households in other dwellings such as mobile homes and transient
housing).
4,642 (4,504 business establishments, 6 major hospitals, 5 colleges, and 127
schools)
Newark, the largest city in New Jersey, is located in Essex County 8 miles
from New York City on Newark Bay at the mouth of the Hudson River. It
has an industrial economy composed of large manufacturing and
transportation sectors. The Port of Newark and Newark Airport are
among the largest employers in the City. Newark is a multicultural city:
58 percent black and 29 percent Caucasian. Twenty-six percent of the
population is of Hispanic origin (black, white and other). Per capita
income in 1987, based on population estimates extrapolated from the 1980
census, was estimated at $7,622. Since Newark's population declined 14.6
percent between the 1980 and 1990 census, it is likely that this figure
underestimates the true average income. (The per capita income in Essex
County in 1987 was $18,515.)
Page 77
-------
Newark, Nap Jersey
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
Annual Tonnages (1989)
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
Disposed
lntinerated§
Landfilled
Generated
Public
Collection*
14,258
6,823
7,435
132,396
467
131,929
146,654
Private
Collectlont
89,522
87,350
2,172
106,034
2,546
103,488
195,556
Total
Waste*
103,780
94,173
9,607
238,430
3.013
235,417
342,210
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
10%
5%
5%
Percent by Weight Recovered*
46%
45%
1%
30%
28%
3%
Atote: Municipally collected auto scrap (7,415 tons) was not included in waste recovered or disposed.
'Publicly collected waste recovered includes a small amount of material from the commercial sector collected at the municipal drop-
off site, and excludes tonnages from multi-unit buildings in the residential sector that are serviced by private haulers. The latter
tonnages are included under private collection.
t Privately collected waste includes some residential waste collected from multi-unit buildings, commercial/institutional waste, ano
C&D debris. The figures for waste recovered and generated do not include 147,176 tons of metal scrap reported as recovered by
private haulers because this tonnage has not yet been confirmed as part of Newark's municipal solid waste stream. If it were
included, Newark's recovery rate would jump to 51 percent C&D waste disposed cannot be separated from municipal solid waste,
but 3,599 tons of C&D debris (1,873 tons of asphalt and 1,726 tons of wood waste) were recovered from Newark's waste stream.
$ Total waste is the sum of public and private collection.
§ Tonnages incinerated represent 467 tons of tires coHected through the municipal program and 2,546 tons of tires collected from
the commercial sector by private haulers, which were shredded at Metropolitan Tire Converters for use as a fuel source.
** Due to rounding, percent recycled and percent composted may not add up to percent recovered.
Transfer Station/
Incinerator Tipping Fees:
Refuse Collection and
Disposal:
$102.15 per ton for household waste, and $109.85 per ton for bulky waste
at transfer stations in 1988,1989, and 1990; $97.30 per ton at the Essex
County Incinerator in 1990
The City of Newark collects refuse from two-thirds of the residential
sector, with the remaining third serviced by Petrozello Disposal Co.
under contract with the City. Some residential waste, such as that
generated in large multi-unit buildings, is collected by private haulers
not under contract with the City. Numerous private haulers collect
commercial and institutional waste and construction and demolition
debris. Additionally, the City and its contractors collect up to three 32-
gfe:'.••; containers from commercial sources twice weekly. The mixed
waste is transported to two transfer stations (one of which collects
primarily residential waste, while the other receives bulky waste)
prior to being hauled to out-of-state landfills. In late 1990, with the
Page 78
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Total Waste Recovered and Disposed (Percent by Weight, 1989)
Disposed 70%
Public Collection Disposed 39%
Private Collection Disposed 31%
-•-.
Recovered 30%
Public Collection Recycled 2%
Public Collection Composted 2%
Private Collection Recycled 26%
Refuse Collection and
Disposal (cont'd):
opening of the Essex County Incinerator, one of the transfer stations
closed. The incinerator began full-scale operation in January 1991.
Materials Recovery Overview
Goals and Legislative
Requirements:
In June of 1987, the City of Newark passed an ordinance mandating source
separation of recyclable materials in compliance with the Statewide
Mandatory Source Separation and Recycling Act (F.L. 1987, c.102) enacted
in April of that year. The State law mandates that each municipality
recycle 15 percent of the municipal solid waste stream in the first year of
its recycling program and 25 percent thereafter. Recycling of a minimum
of three materials is required. In December 1989, Newark revised the
ordinance so that its definitions were consistent with those in the Essex
County Solid Waste Plan. In 1991 the State revised its goal to require a 60
percent recovery of materials by 1995.
Page 79
-------
Newark, New Jersey
As early as 1975, the City of Newark and Essex County, faced with diminishing landfill space and
rising waste disposal costs, published the Solid Waste Disposal-Plan of Action, the culmination of a
year of planning to alleviate soir c of the City's waste disposal problems. Recommended in the Flan
was the construction of a refuse-derived fuel plant. A contract was awarded to Combustion Equipment
Associates (CEA) in the late 1970s, but when a similar operation in Bridgeport, Connecticut failed, the
company declared bankruptcy and Essex County advertised for the receipt of bids for a 2,100-ton-per-
day municipal solid waste incinerator. Opposition of local community organizations to the incinerator
delayed its construction. In July 1987, a consent agreement to cease landfilling in the nearby
Meadowlands landfill was signed. The dosing of the landfill and the persistent opposition to the
incinerator necessitated the construction of two transfer stations to handle waste prior to long-distance
hauling and disposal out of state.
In December 1987, in response to the New Jersey Statewide Mandatory Source Separation and
Recycling Act, the City of Newark initiated a pilot program for curbside collection of bundled
newspaper in four of its nine zones. The program was expanded on June 15,1988 to include citywide
collection of commingled glass, aluminum, and bimetal bottles and cans, in addition to newspapers.
Severe fiscal constraints imposed by the economy of the late 1970s and early 1980s prompted the City of
Newark to privatize many municipal services in the hopes of increasing efficiency through reduced
costs, improved service delivery, and competition between municipal and contract employees.
Recycling was no exception. During the first year of the curbside recycling program, the City contracted
the services of The Occupational Center (OC), a community-based nonprofit organization that trains
and educates handicapped individuals. OC was responsible for the collection of recyclables in two-
thirds of Newark's residential zones. The City collected recyclables in the remaining third. In June
1989, the City contracted with Essex Recycled Fibers for the collection of recyclables from those areas
that OC had serviced in the previous year, and OC took over collection from the third of the City
formerly serviced by municipal crews. In 1989, the City began offering weekly collection of corrugated
cardboard from businesses; it now offers this service to almost 250 businesses in the City, on a twice-a-
week schedule.
Since the inception of the municipal curbside program, the Office of Recycling has undertaken an
aggressive publicity and education campaign to encourage participation and to inform residents and
businesses about the need and mandate to recycle. A study on participation rate conducted by the New
School for Social Research in April 1989, found a correlation between participation rate and both
median income and owner occupancy. Owner-occupied households or those with higher median income
were more likely to participate in the recycling program. However, this study was conducted within
the first year of the program; since then, total tonnages collected through the municipal program have
increased. Because no further studies on participation rate have been conducted, it is unclear if
participation has changed. The Office of Recycling has attempted to reach those neighborhoods
believed to exhibit low participation through direct mailings, bilingual publications, and other media.
Newark continues to endorse strict environmental legislation. In early 1989, the City Council
banned polystyrene and polyvinylchloride from use in retail food establishments. Later that year, the
City Council passed a special ordinance restricting the release of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). All firms
that service home or auto air conditioners, or refrigeration equipment, are now required to recycle and
prevent the release of ozone-depleting chemicals. An ordinance requiring municipal agencies to
purchase recycled products took effect in early 1990. In order to solicit input from businesses and
community leaders, the City of Newark formed the Blue Ribbon Recycling Advisory Committee
(BRRAC). A 19-member committee composed of representatives from community organizations, special
interest groups, corporations, recycling businesses, and the City government, the Committee's purpose is
to make recommendations on increasing the scope of recycling within the City. The committee has
focused on evaluating plans proposed by the Office of Recycling, including plans to increase curbside
recycling participation in general and the participation of multi-unit housing residents in particular.
Privately collected material, generated primarily by the commercial sector, accounts for less than
half of the waste disposed and more than 85 percent of the waste recovered in the City. The daily
influx of commuters to the City may be largely responsible for these high numbers. According to the
Page 80
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Manager of the Department of Engineering, the number of commuters triples Newark's population
during the work week; many take advantage of office collection programs and bring their recyclables to
work. The Office of Recycling and private haulers both report that area businesses are eager to
participate in commercial recycling.
Newark's Office of Recycling, which works under the Department of Engineering, has achieved
national and worldwide recognition for its highly successful efforts in recycling and waste
minimization. Newark received two statewide awards for its recycling program in 1988, and an Award
of Merit from American City and County Magazine in 1989. In 1990 Newark received awards from the
US. Conference of Mayors, Public Technology, Inc., and the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection, as well as honorable mention from the National League of Cities, for its recycling program
and source reduction initiatives. In April 1991, the New Jersey Environmental Lobby presented Mayor
Sharpe James with an achievement award for his work in Newark, and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) gave the New York Region Recycling Achievement Award to Newark. In May
1991, the City was the national winner of the Local Government Award in the EPA's first annual
Administrator's Awards program, which honored innovative recycling programs.
Recycling Activities
Residential Curbside Recycling
Start-up Date:
Service Provider:
Pick-up Frequency:
Same Day as Refuse:
Households Served:
Mandatory:
Participation Rate:
June 15,1988 (A pilot program for newspaper recycling began in December
1987, servicing households in four zones of the City.)
Until June 1989, the City Division of Sanitation collected recyclables from
one-third of the residential sector, and the Occupational Center (CO, a
nonprofit training center for the handicapped, collected from the
remaining two-thirds. As of June 1989, OC took over the City's collection
zones and Essex Recycled Fibers, Inc. was contracted to collect recydables
from the remaining two-thirds of the residential sector.
Weekly. Newspaper and commingled recyclables are collected on
alternate weeks. Beginning October 21, 1991, all recyclables will be
collected weekly.
Yes
All households in single and multi-unit housing that the City services
with refuse collection either through its crews or under contract with a
private hauler. This is estimated to be 90,000 household units.
Yes
The City does not track participation rate. A study conducted within the
first year of the program found the participation rate to be 16 percent of
the households surveyed (38 percent of the buildings), based on set-outs
per month.1
Materials Collected: Newspaper, glass, aluminum, and bimetal cans
Page 81
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Set-out Method:
Collection Method and
Vehicles:
Economic Incentives;
Annual Tonnage
Commingled glass bottles, aluminum, and bimetal cans are placed at
curbside in paper bags or recycling containers. Newspapers are bundled
and either tied with string or placed in brown paper bags. As of June 1991,
the City had distributed 20,000 8-gallon recycling containers to residents
at no charge. Of these, 10,000 were provided in 1988, 5,000 in 1989, and
5,000 in 1990. The City has budgeted for 12,000 20-gallon bins to be
dispersed in 1991.
Commingled bottles and cans are collected one week, and newspapers and
magazines are collected the following week. Essex Recycling Fibers uses
23-cubic-yard Eager Beaver trucks with a crew of three persons (one
driver and two laborers) for the collection of both. Occupational Center
crews—also consisting of a driver and two laborers—collect recydables in
three Eager Beaver trailers with five compartments each hitched to a
Nissan cab. Commingled materials are not sorted on route.
None
Enforcement began in January 1991 with three municipal enforcement
officers performing spot checks for recyclables in residential refuse. As of
July 1991,863 warnings had been issued to residents. After two warnings,
residents are subject to a fine of up to $25 per violation. The Office of
Recycling credits enforcement with the 20 percent (by weight) increase in
recyclables collected at curbside between the first quarter of 1990 and the
first quarter of 1991. In October 1991, the City began to issue fines.
Between October and February, the City had issued 575 fines.
5,223 tons were collected at curbside in 1989
Multi-unit Collection
State law requires that landlords and managers of multi-unit residential buildings establish
recycling plans for their buildings, and that tenants or owners of units source-separate recyclable
materials as required by municipal ordinance. In May 1988, the Newark City Council passed an
ordinance requiring that proposals for the construction of 50 or more single-family residential housing
units or of 25 or more units of multi-unit housing, incorporate provisions for recycling.
The City is working with the Newark Housing Authority to expand its collection from public
housing complexes in the City. The expansion is expected to be implemented by 1992. As of mid-1991,
the Office of Recycling provides collection of recyclables from a Housing Authority senior citizen
complex. The Office of Recycling supphes 20-gallon bins for bottles and cans, and bins for newspapers,
which are placed in conveniently loaned storage areas on each floor of the complex. Maintenance
crews bring the recydables out to 6-cuoic-yard dumpsters, where City crews collect them. The seniors
keep the aluminum and sell it to raise funds for events at the complex.
Page 82
-------
Newark;, NAD Jersey
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling
Legislative
Requir
Service Providen
Number Served:
Type Served:
Materials Collected:
Pick-up Frequency:
Set-out and Collection
Method:
Incentives:
Enforcement:
Annual Tonnage:
The Essex County Solid Waste Plan mandates that municipalities
provide, at a minimum, drop-off sites for corrugated cardboard and office
paper. The City of Newark requires that, in addition to these materials,
all commercial establishments must recycle newspapers, glass food and
beverage containers, and aluminum and bimetal cans.
The City of Newark's Office of Recycling collected corrugated cardboard
from a small corridor of the City in 1989. Collection was expanded in 1990
to include all major business corridors. In addition, more than 88
companies reported collecting recyclable materials from Newark's
commercial establishments and institutions in 1989.
In 1989 approximately 70 businesses were served by the City, with
curbside corrugated cardboard collection. As of mid-1991,247 businesses
were serviced with curbside corrugated cardboard collection. The number
of commercial businesses served by private haulers is not available.
Office buildings, retail stores, public buildings, butcher shops, and
supermarkets
Varies with recycler. Materials may include high-grade paper, mixed
paper, newspapers, corrugated cardboard, aluminum and bimetal cans,
glass, used motor oil, tires, lead-acid, mercury and nickel-cadmium
batteries, ferrous and nonferrous scrap metal, and food waste.
Newark's Office of Recycling collects corrugated cardboard weekly.
Businesses must arrange with private recyclers for curbside/alley pick-up
of other recyclables.
On City routes, corrugated cardboard must be stacked and tied, or baled
and placed at curbside. Three-person City crews collect corrugated
cardboard using one packer truck. Many private haulers provide
commercial establishments with bins for recyclable materials. Set-out
method varies among private haulers.
The City does not charge for corrugated cardboard collection. Most
private recyclers charge business/institutional establishments lower
rates for the collection of recyclables than refuse haulers charge for refuse
collection.
Fines of up to $1,000. No enforcement fines had been issued as of mid-1991.
Not available
In 1989 more than 85 percent of materials recovered in Newark were collected from the commercial
sector. Of these materials, 82 percent was waste paper. Recycled Fibers of New Jersey reported
collecting 47,995 tons of waste paper, or 63 percent of all the old newsprint, corrugated cardboard, high-
grade and mixed paper reported as recovered in Newark. Recycled Fibers works on a driver account
system; the driver establishes independent accounts primarily with offices for the collection of waste
paper. Below is a sampling of firms that offer collection of recyclable materials from the commercial
sector.
Page 83
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Regional Recycling: Regional Recycling, a company that has been collecting and baling waste
paper for over 20 years, services businesses of all sizes. In addition to mixed paper and corrugated
cardboard, Regional Recycling collects glass, aluminum, and ferrous metals. Recydables can be set out
commingled in bins provided by the company, and are collected with roll-offs, packers, rack trucks, or
pick-ups, depending on the volume of recyclable materials generated by the customer.
P. Pepe & Sons: Another paper processor, P. Pepe & Sons, provides plastic hampers for its
commercial customers. The hampers are stored in an area centrally located for office staff and
collection crews. Office staff or janitorial staff deliver mixed office paper and computer paper to the
central hampers. Waste paper is collected in 1- to 15-ton loads, using 24-foot-long trucks, and hauled to
the processing facility. In 1989 the company collected corrugated cardboard and newsprint at no charge,
and paid customers for mixed office paper. Now, most waste paper processors in New Jersey are
charging their customers. Pepe & Sons also accepts computer paper and white paper at its drop-off site.
Standard Tallow: Rendering operations in Newark have their roots in the whaling days when
soap, candles, and oil for lamps were produced from the remains of whales caught off the Atlantic
Coast Nowadays, the primary input for the production of tallow is meat waste from butchers and
supermarkets. Standard Tallow provides barrels to customers, which it collects up to two times per
week. The meat scraps and grease are used to produce tallow for soap, cosmetics, and candles, and for
the production of animal feed. Of the 1,400 tons of food waste collected in Newark in 1989,1,168 tons
were collected by Standard Tallow.
Drop-Off Centers
Number and Type There are more than 50 drop-off centers and scrap yards in Newark,
including the Newark Recycling Depot, which is operated by the City.
Public or Private: One is public; all others are private.
Sectors Served: Residential and commercial
Materials Accepted: Newark's municipal drop-off site collects newspaper, corrugated
cardboard, magazines, glass, aluminum and bimetal cans, white goods,
used motor oil, tires, and lead-acid and nickel-cadmium batteries.
Materials collected at private drop-off/buyback centers include high-
grade paper, mixed paper, newspapers, corrugated cardboard, glass,
aluminum and bimetal cans, used motor oil, tires, lead-acid, mercury, and
nickel-cadmium batteries, and ferrous and nonferrous scrap metal.
Annual Tonnage: 1523 tons through the Newark Recycling Depot in 1989. Tonnages from
the other drop-off sites, which are privately run, are not available.
Salvage/Reuse
Goodwill Industries has a used clothing bin at Newark's Recycling Depot where residents can drop
off old clothing for reuse.
Page 84
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Processing and Marketing of Recyclable Materials
Residential Sector Materials
Materials from Newark's municipal curbside program and drop-off are processed at an
intermediate processing center, Distributors Recycling, and at a local paper mill, Newark Boxboard. In
the first half of 1989, Newark also had arrangements with Zozzaro Brothers in Clifton, New Jersey
and P. Pepe & Sons in Newark for the processing of newspaper, magazines, and marketed corrugated
cardboard to a broker, Paper Recycling Corporation. As of the second quarter of 1990, all corrugated
cardboard, as well as other paper collected through municipal programs, is processed at Newark
Boxboard.
Distributors Recycling, Inc., of Newark opened in mid-1983 as a private bottle and can decasing
operation, with the primary purpose of recycling New York bottle bill returns. Trucks from local
beverage distributors and breweries bring cases of empty bottles and cans to the facility, where glass,
aluminum, and corrugated cardboard are recycled. In 1986 Distributors Recycling began negotiating
contracts with several New Jersey municipalities for the processing of their curbside recyclables.
Having secured contracts with more than 60 municipalities, REI Distributors, the parent company of
Distributors Recycling, built a 60,000-square-foot intermediate processing center (IPC) adjacent to the
decasing operation in 1988, at an approximate cost of $900,000. In 1989 the IPC employed 15 people (10
on a sorting line and 5 in administration). The capital costs of the operation were between $1 million
and $1.5 million. Yearly operating and maintenance costs are estimated between $490,000 and $690,000,
of which more than 55 percent is labor.
Municipalities deliver glass (flint, amber, green, and mixed), aluminum, ferrous scrap, tin and
bimetal cans (and, as of August 1989, PET plastics) to the facility (5 to 10 miles from collection routes),
which is operated in two 8-hour shifts, 5 days per week. HDPE was added to the list of materials
processed by the facility in early 1990; detergent bottles were added later that year.
The City of Newark is paid $12 per ton for commingled recyclables provided they contain at least 3
percent aluminum (by weight). Other municipalities and private haulers are paid from $8 to $12 per
ton, depending on the terms of the contractual arrangement. Distributors Recycling processes more than
240 tons of commingled recyclables per day. In 1989 the IPC processed 63,500 tons of recyclable
materials. The addition of plastics has decreased the tonnage processed each day to approximately
200. Commingled materials from Newark's curbside program are dropped onto a pad, inspected, and
turned onto conveyors for sorting. Metals and plastics are mechanically removed from glass. Glass is
hand-sorted by color, and plastics are hand-sorted by resin. Eddy current magnetic separators separate
ferrous metals from aluminum cans. A $450,000 glass cleaning system is used to clean glass. Processed
materials are sold to various end users. Anchor Glass Container and Owens Brockway purchase most of
the glass processed at the facility. Aluminum is baled and marketed domestically. Plastics are baled
and marketed both domestically and overseas. Some ground glass residue is sold and recycled into
asphalt. According to George Wolfson of Distributors Recycling, less than 5 percent of the incoming
commingled materials is residue. As of 1991, REI has moved to a 100,000-square-foot facility in
Newark, and is planning to install equipment for washing plastic.
Newspapers and magazines collected through the municipal curbside program and corrugated
cardboard collected by the City and by some private haulers are processed primarily at Newark
Boxboard. The plant produces 125 tons per day of chipboard from 140 tons of various grades of waste
paper, including corrugated cardboard and newspapers.
Materials collected through the municipal drop-off center, including bulky items from the
Department of Sanitation's bulk item collection, are marketed to various end users. In 1989,246 tons of
tires from Newark were sold to Tirec Systems, Inc., a local firm that produces crumb rubber for use in
road resurfacing. (As of 1990, approximately 270 tons of crumb rubber were used in approximately 9,000
tons of modified mix for paving Newark streets.) Newark also delivered 467 tons of tires to
Metropolitan Tire Converters at a tipping fee of $70 per ton. Metropolitan Tire does not recycle tires but
sells the shredded material to a firm in Greece, which uses it as fuel in cement production. Much of the
Page 85
-------
Newark, New Jersey
cement is imported back tothe United States through the Port of Newark for use in construction. White
goods collected at curbside and the Recycling Depot are sold to local scrap dealers. Labor costs of
removing PCB-laden capacitors from white goods outweigh the return from the sale of scrap metal, but,
according to the Office of Recycling, the avoided disposal costs make recycling white goods
worthwhile for Newark. "'
In 1989,9,000 abandoned vehicles were removed from City streets. In exchange for the ferrous scrap
value, local towing companies are granted franchises for the removal of deserted vehicles from
Newark's streets and lots. (The 7/415 tons of auto scrap recovered in 1989 are not included in the tonnage
figures in this case study.)
Commercial Sector Materials
Many private recyclers that collect materials from commercial establishments have sorting and
baling operations, and market the baled products independently or through a broker. Most small
operations are currently experiencing financial difficulties. According to Ron Delucia, General Manager
of Regional Recycling, the market for mixed paper (office paper, computer paper, colored ledger) is at a
low point. Five years ago, he could sell waste paper for $5 per ton; now it costs $40 per ton to unload it.
Likewise, the market for corrugated cardboard is poor. As of mid-1991, old corrugated cardboard was
selling for $15 per ton in New Jersey; 5 years ago, a ton sold for $75-$80. Delucia estimates less than 10
percent by weight of materials collected by Regional Recycling are rejected as nonrecyclable.
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement
An informal "buy recycled" policy has been in effect in Newark for several years. In the late 1980s,
the City purchased crumb rubber from old tires for resurfacing City streets, recycled plastic park
benches, and recycled paper for office copying and for printing publications. Newark has recently
adopted EPA procurement guidelines as mandatory. In 1990 the Newark City Council passed an
ordinance requiring municipal agencies to purchase recycled products. Directors of all City departments
and agencies must recommend changes to incorporate the use of recycled materials, reusable products,
and recyclables to the maximum extent practicable. Outside contractors that provide products or
services for the City must also comply with the City's requirement to procure recycled products.
The Department of Engineering hosted three recycling forums for local businesses in late 1990.
Representatives from more than 50 white collar, retail, manufacturing, and automotive-related
businesses attended the forums. The businesses were encouraged to use the City's "Buy Recycled" data
base, which contains information on more than 2,000 manufacturers and suppliers of finished goods
made from recycled materials.
Composting Activities
Newark began composting leaves collected at curbside in 1986. In 1987 a State law banning the
landfill disposal of leaves was passed. In the same year, the composting program was expanded to
include collection of grass clippings, branches, and Christmas trees. From leaf collection alone, the City
recovered mre than 8,000 cubic yards in 1987, more than 15,000 cubic yards in 1988, and more than 22,000
cubic yards it ^89.
Page 86
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Newark offers other municipalities the use of excess capacity at its compost facility. The City
received $47,367 in 1989 from other New Jersey municipalities that dropped off leaves at Newark's
compost facility.
Christmas trees are collected at curbside in Newark for 3 weeks following New Year's Day.
Private tree removal services remove stumps and brush from City streets and lots under contract with
the City's Department of Engineering. These materials are then privately chipped and used for
landscaping. The' City's WIN (Working Inmates Network) program employs laborers from the
Northern State Prison to clean vacant lots in the City of refuse and brush. Small amounts of brush
collected through this program are chipped at the compost facility.
Curbside Collection
Start-up Date:
Service Provider:
Households Served:
Materials Collected:
Mandatory:
Set-out Method:
Collection Vehicles and
Method:
Collection Frequency
Economic Incentives:
Annual Tonnage
October 1986
The City of Newark contracts with three private haulers (Basso, Inc.,
Tobia Bros., and A&A Inc.) to collect yard waste and haul it to the
compost site.
All households, as needed
Leaves, grass clippings, brush, and Christmas trees
Yes, for leaves and grass dippings
Yard waste must be placed at curbside either loose or in degradable bags.
Christmas trees must be free of adornments and set out at the curb.
Several packers (30 and 40 cubic yards), dump trucks (16,18, and 22 cubic
yards), and roll-offs (20 and 30 cubic yards) supplied by private haulers
are used for the collection of yard waste.
Leaves and grass clippings and brush are collected weekly from October
through January.
None
7/435 tons in 1989.
Page 87
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Composting Site
The compost facility, an 11-acre site, is located on East Rutherford Street in an industrial area of
Newark. The facility is owned by the Fassaic Valley Sewage Commission and leased to the City for $1
a year. The City uses approximately 7.5 of the 11 acres for the composting process. Municipal crews and
contractors transport leaves and grass clippings to the site. Newark employs three municipal workers
and several state prison inmates at the site. The inmates empty bags of yard waste and remove any
contaminating refuse. Of the three municipal employees, a supervisor oversees the operation and spot
checks yard waste for contaminants, another employee operates the loader, and a third waters the
windrows. Leaves and grass clippings are arranged in windrows 12 feet wide by 9 feet high. The
windrows are watered once a month and turned every 2 weeks. At the height of the season (late
November) there are over 60 windrows. The compost is tested twice a year by a State agricultural
expert and more often by the City. Finished compost is ready in 12 to 18 months, when it is screened and
made available to City residents and nonprofit horticultural organizations. It is estimated that
between 75 and 85 percent of the material produced at the composting facility is distributed to Rutgers
University for its Urban Gardening and to the greater Newark Conservancy Programs. According to the
Essex County Cooperative Extension Service agent, the Urban Gardening Program has established 266
community gardens and 540 backyard gardens. Two thousand pounds of fruits and vegetables grown in
urban gardens were given away to senior citizens and shelter houses in local neighborhoods. The
compost is also used for beautification in City parks and recreation areas. A small amount is sold to
private businesses for $2 per cubic yard.
The Division of Sanitation loans a chipper to the Office of Recycling for 3 weeks in January for the
chipping of Christmas trees. While the tonnage of Christmas trees collected in 1989 is not available,
in 1990 approximately 1% tons were collected. Chipped trees were distributed to City residents and
landscapers.
Page 88
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
Material
Newspaper
Corrugated Cardboard
High-grade Paper
Other Paper
Commingled
Glass
Plastic
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous Cans
Nonferrous
Appliances/White Goods
Food Waste
Tires
Motor Oil
Batteries
Textiles
Subtotal MSW Recycled
Leaves and Grass Clippings*
Brush and Christmas Trees§
Stumps & Chips**
Subtotal MSW Composted
Total MSW Recovered
Asphalt
Wood Waste
Total C&D Recovered
Total Materials Recycled
Total Materials Composted
Total Materials Recovered
Public
Collection*
(Tons, 1989)
2,888
77
35
-
2,781
—
-
-
-
1
795
-
246
-
-
—
6,823
2,850
4,585
-
7,435
14,258
—
-
-
6,823
7,435
14,258
Private
Collection
(Tons, 1989)
28,376
6,404
2,362
36,341
2
8,782
_
828
12
_
300
1,400
42
525
93
10
85,477
—
-
446
446
85,923
—
.
-
85,477
446
85,923
Other
(Tons, 1989)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
1,873
1,726
3,599
1,873
1,726
3,599
Total
(Tons, 1989)
31,264
6,481
2,397
36,341
2,783
8,782
t
828
12
1
1,095
1,400
288
525
93
10
92,300
2,850
4,585
446
7,881
100,181
1,873
1,726
3,599
94,173
9,607
103,780
Note: White 131,049 tons of ferrous scrap and 16,127 tons of nonferrous metal were reported by Newark as material recovered from
the commercial sector, ILSR has not verified that this is part of the City's municipal solid waste stream.
• Of the 6,823 tons of recydables collected from the residential sector, 5,223 tons were collected through the City's curbside
residential program, 77 tons of corrugated cardboard were collected through its commercial recycling program, and 1,523 tons were
collected through its drop-off site.
tOne-tenth of a ton
$ In 1989,22,801 cubic yards of leaves and other yard waste were collected. Newark uses a conversion factor of 8 cubic yards per
ton, yielding 2,850 tons.
§ In 1989 the City collected 18,341 cubic yards of brush and Christmas trees. Newark uses a conversion factor of 4 cubic yards per
ton. Seven hundred and eighty-six cubic yards of Christmas trees were collected in 1990, but a breakdown is not available for
1989.
** Four hundred and forty-six tons of stumps and chips were recovered by private tree trimming companies.
Page 89
-------
Newgrk, New Jersey
Source Reduction Initiatives
Newark has actively promoted solid waste source reduction. The City has initiated a precyding
campaign modeled after the Berkeley, California program, to encourage environmentally conscious
shopping. The campaign, conducted through newspaper advertisements, direct mailings, and
presentations to community organizations, includes suggestions for product selection, and encourages
consumers to purchase products that are not heavily packaged, or are packaged in recyclable materials;
to buy in bulk; to avoid disposables; and to voice concerns and suggestions about store purchasing policies
to local retailers. In 1990 a special feature on precyding was included in Newark's curbside collection
calendar mailing to residents.
In February 1989, the Newark City Council passed an ordinance banning the use and sale of
polystyrene and polyvinyl chloride, and the use of nondegradable plastic packaging in retail
establishments. All fast-food restaurants, cafeterias, delis and other food establishments are now
using degradable paper packaging. Several cafeterias have switched to reusable utensils, plates, cups,
and carry-out containers. Among these are the cafeterias in the Federal Building, PSE&G, and New
Jersey Bell.
In addition to these initiatives, the City rewards businesses and institutions for practicing source
reduction. On Earth Day 1991, Mayor Sharpe James presented awards to Blue Cross and Blue Shield of
New Jersey, Public Service Electric and Gas, and Seton Hall University School of Law for outstanding
achievement in source reduction.
Publicity and Education
Prior to launching its curbside recycling program, Newark hired a local minority public relations
firm, The Writing Company, to spearhead a campaign for educating the public about the new program.
The initial campaign, "Sort it Out," was conducted primarily through colorful billboards and direct
household mailings. The first mailing was a detailed brochure containing a map of the resident's area,
a list of the streets in his/her collection zone, and a calendar of scheduled pick-up days for recyclables.
A second mailing, a postcard/decal, was sent as a reminder to residents to source-separate. The decal,
which displayed the message "Sort it Out, It's as easy as 1, 2, 3," could be placed on containers for
recyclables. A third mailing in December 1988 and a fourth in mid-1989 contained the 1989 curbside
collection schedule for recyclables. Enclosed with the 1990 collection calendar mailing was an entry
certificate for a "Recycling Drawing." Winners, one from each of the nine zones, received $50 gift
certificates from an area supermarket (Foodtown) for the purchase of any food or drink packaged in
recyclable materials. Two grand prize winners were awarded $100 certificates, and each winner
received "Newark Recycles" tee shirts and recycling buckets.
Through newspapers, television and radio advertising, direct mailings, billboards, and other
media, The Writing Company continues to reach residents, school children, and business persons in the
Newark area. Most mailings and bulletins are translated into Spanish and Portuguese in order to reach
the communities in which these are the primary languages spoken. In 1990 The Writing Company
produced two videos explaining and promoting Newark's recycling and composting programs for outside
audiences and for residents within the City. The first is intended for viewing by schools and civic
organizations; the second, a 14-minute documentary entitled "Newark: The Global City," details
Newark's many successes in environmental policy and is intended to appeal to many audiences. These
videos made Newark one of four national award winners of the Arts and Entertainment Competition
sponsored by the National League of Cities Annual Conference.
For children, The Writing Company organizes an annual Recyding Poster Contest. Begun in 1988,
the contest invites students from grades 4 through 12 to create posters with a recycling theme. Hundreds
of students enter the contest, which is cosponsored by the Office of Recycling and the Newark Board of
Page 90
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Education. In 1989,13 students won cash prizes ranging from $25 to $250. The "Recycling Rangers"
program was initiated to encourage students to spread the word about recycling to their parents and
friends. New Rangers are inducted at presentations and functions sponsored by the Office of Recycling.
In August 1990, the Office of Recycling sponsored a Sculpture Art Contest at the Newark Public Library.
Contestants had to use recyclable materials including cans, glass bottles and jars, newspapers,
magazines, cardboard, and tires. The contest was open to pupils in grades four through eight. Among
the prizes were 1- to 6-month scholarships at the Newark Community School for the Arts, and $25
savings bonds.
In the spring of 1991, "The Woes of Waste," a puppet show sponsored by the Office of Recycling,
was shown to school children. The City is employing a resident puppet theater, the Rainbow Puppet
Workshop, to teach elementary school children the importance of recycling. A representative from the
Office of Recycling gives a brief presentation on the City's laws and the curbside collection program at
each showing. After the puppet show, the participating students are sworn in as Recycling Rangers.
Economics
Costs Coven
In 1989, 5,223 tons of recyclable materials and an estimated 7,435 tons of
organic waste (yard waste and Christmas trees) were collected at curbside
through the City's residential curbside recycling program. Another 77 tons of
corrugated cardboard were collected from the commercial sector by the City
and 1,523 tons were collected at the City's Recycling Depot.
Capital Costs: Between January and June 1989, Gty crews collected 345 tons of
recyclables from the residential sector at curbside and 77 tons of corrugated
cardboard from the commercial sector. The costs of the trucks used to collect
these materials are given below. The remaining 4,878 residential tons of
recyclables were collected by private haulers and paid for by the City in the
form of yearly contract fees listed under operating and maintenance costs.
Intermediate processing of the recyclables is handled by the private sector;
capital costs for processing are not available. The City's capital costs for the
collection of 77 tons of corrugated cardboard is listed below.
The City's capital costs for the collection of recyclables include an Eager
Beaver, recycling truck, which City crews used to collect 345 tons of material,
and a packer truck, which was used to collect 77 tons of corrugated cardboard;
both are listed below. The City's capital costs for composting or chipping
7,435 tons of organic waste in 1989 are also given below. The City does not
incur any capital costs for yard waste collection, since these are included in
contract fees paid to private haulers.
Operating and maintenance costs: incurred by the City in 1989 include contract
fees and City labor costs for the curbside collection of 5300 tons of recyclable
materials (including the 77 tons of corrugated cardboard) and 7,435 tons of
organic waste; City labor costs for 1323 tons of materials accepted at the
municipal drop-off center; and administrative, education, and publicity costs.
Page 91
-------
Jersey w
Capital Costs; Collection by City Crews
Item
31 -cubic-yard Packer Truck*
14-cubic-yard Eager Beaver
Recydere
Cost
$84.000
34,600
Use
Recycling
Recycling
Year Incurred
1984
1988
Note: The City floats bonds lor the purchase of equipment listed. Equipment is amortized over a 5-year period. Other capital
costs were incurred by private haulers under contact with the City.
*The packer tuck, used for the collection of corrugated cardboard, was purchased in 1984 by the City's Department of Sanitation.
Its $84,000 cost, was estimated by Newark's Recycling Coordinator.
Capital Costs; Yard Waste Processing
Item
Chipper (@ 6% of use)*
Front-end Loader
Royer Shredder-Mixer*
Cost
$14,000
84,000
95,000
Use
Composting
Composting
Composting
Year incurred
1984
NA
1986
Note: The City floats bonds for the purchase of equipment listed. Equipment is amortized over a 5-year period. Other capital
costs were incurred by private haulers under contract with the City.
•The chipper is supplied by the Department of Sanitation for chipping Christmas trees. The Office of Recycling estimates that
chipping Christmas trees consumes 6 percent of the dripper's available time.
t The capacity of the Royer purchased in 1986 was too small to handle the volume of leaves collected and brought to the
composting facility. Thus, beginning in 1989, the City leased a Screen-All from Newark Disposal for $60 per hour, 8 hours per day,
125 days per year, for a total cost of $60,000 per year. This cost is included under operating and maintenance costs.
Page 92
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Annual and Per Ton Operating and Maintenance Costs (1989)
Cost
Recycling Subtotal $1,004,314
Collection $744,023
Curbside Collection 728,852
City Crews (3 zones/6 months) 65,397
OC Contract (6 zones/5 months) 191,590
OC Contract (3 zones/6 months) 74,865
Essex Contract (6 zones/6 months) 397,000
Drop-Off Collection 10,695
Corrugated Cardboard Collection* 4,476
Processingt 0
Administration 188,291
Education/Publicity 72,000
Composting Subtotal $189,291
Collection $71,136
Processing 80,155
Administration 20,000
Education/Publicity 18,000
Recycling & Composting TotalS $1,193,605
Collection $815,159
Processing 80,155
Administration 208,291
Education/Publicity 90.000
Tons Covered Per Ton Cost
6,823
6,823
5,223
345
1,677
530
2,671
1,523
77
6,823
6,823
6,823
7,435
7,435
7,435
7,435
7,435
14,258
14,258
14,258
14,258
14,258
$147
$109
140
190
114
141
149
7
58
0
28
11
$25
$10
11
3
2
$84
$57
6
15
6
Note: Tons covered include residential recyclables and organic wastes collected through the City's residential eurbskJe program,
totalling 14,181 tons, plus 77 tons of corrugated cardboard collected from commercial establishments by the City. Due to rounding,
breakdown of per ton costs do not add to total.
* Corrugated cardboard collection began in November at a cost of $4,475.50 for the remaining two months of 1989. Costs are
estimated based on the cost of two laborers at a wage of $8.31 per hour and one truck driver at $9.20 per hour, for 20 hours per
week, which would total $26,853 per year.
t Processing costs for recyclable materials are incurred by (he private sector.
Yard waste collection costs include fees paid to three haulers by the Division of Sanitation for leaf
collection for 36 days, 8 hours per day, at an average of $35 per hour per truck and $46 per hour per
loader, totalling $71,136. Yard waste processing costs include the cost of leasing a Screen-All in the
amount of $60,000 and the cost of three laborers (one at 75 percent time and two at 25 percent time) in
the amount of $20,155. Total processing costs for 1989 were $80,155.
Administrative expenditures for the recycling program include $100,018 in wages and salaries for
administration and support staff, and $107,206 for supplies, copying, printing services, advertising, and
other in-office expenses. Education and publicity expenses include the contract fee paid to The Writing
Company for the promotion of Newark's recycling program.
Page 93
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Materials Revenues: The Office of Recycling received1 $53,004 in fiscal year 1989 for the sale of
commingled glass bottles and cans, newspaper, office paper, corrugated
cardboard, and light iron and metallic scrap.
Source of Funding: New Jersey Tonnage Grant and City of Newark General Fund. In 1989 the
Office of Recycling was awarded $199,178 through the State tonnage
grant program.
Full-time Employees: 5 full-time employees. (From January to June 1989, the City of Newark
employed 8 people full-time for the collection of recyclable materials,
" and 3 municipal employees and 4 state prison inmates for the processing of
yard waste at the compost sites.)
Part-time Employees: None
Future Solid Waste Management Flans
Newark's Office of Recycling is awaiting funding from the State for 12,000 20-gallon residential
recycling bins, which are expected to increase participation in the municipal curbside program.
Newark also plans to incorporate a recycling education puppet workshop into the City's kindergarten
through sixth grade curriculum. Enforcement of mandatory source separation for residents and
businesses began in early 1991 and looks promising. Issuance of warning notices began on January 1991,
and fines were issued as of October 1991. The Office of Recycling plans to increase the use of enforcement
to gain greater participation from Newark's residential and commercial sectors. The City has also
observed that the switch to weekly collection of recyclable materials also has increased the amount of
material collected. In November 1991, 20 percent more material was collected than in November the
previous year.
In mid-1992, the City began to request bids for awarding a new contract for the collection of
residential recyclables in the one-third of the City currently serviced by The Occupational Center
(OC). The City prefers that the future contractor pick-up both refuse and recyclables from this sector,
so that vehicles can be shared. The City is also requesting that the hauler awarded the collection
contract supply residents 20-gallon recycling containers with recycled content. The City will assign OC
workers another recycling or public works function.
Literature is being produced to encourage recycling in high-rise apartment buildings and to inform
owners about their responsibilities. The Office of Recycling is drafting more stringent legislation,
targeting large multi-unit buildings in order to promote participation and increase collection of
recyclable materials. Finally, the Department of Engineering, which oversees the Office of Recycling,
is lobbying for bottle bill legislation in the State to increase the recovery of glass and metal beverage
containers.
Page 94
-------
Newark, New Jersey
Contacts
Gregory Ne verson Frank Sudol
Municipal Recycling Coordinator Manager, Division of Engineering
Office of Recycling & Contract Administration
62 Frelinghuysen Ave Department of Engineering
Newark, NJ 07102 920 Broad Street
Phone (201) 733-6683 Room 410
Fax (201) 733-5961 Newark, NJ 07102
Phone (201) 733-4356
Fax (201) 733-4772
George Wolf son
Recycling Enterprises, Inc.
Distributors Recycling
PO Box 5250
100 Franklin Square Drive
Suite 105
Somerset, NJ 08875-5250
Phone (201) 824-0404
References
City of Newark, Department of Engineering. Annual Report 1989.
Morris, David, et al. Getting the Most from Our Materials: Making New Jersey the State of the Art.
Institute for Local Self-Reliance: Washington, D.C., June 1991.
Sudol, Frank, J. Newark, New Jersey Recycles. August 1990.
Sudol, Frank, J. "Newark Waste Programs Are Privatized for Savings." Resource Recycling.
Sudol, Frank, J. and Alvin L. Zach. "Newark's Curbside Recycling Program: A Participation Rate
Study." New Jersey Municipalities, February 1990.
Endnotes
i In April 1989, graduate students at the New School for Social Research conducted a study on participation in
Newark's curbside recycling program. They found that recyclables were set out at least once a month in front of
37.7 percent of the buildings surveyed. The buildings included both single-family houses and small multi-unit
buildings. Based on the number of households within the buildings in the study group, it was estimated that 16
percent set out recyclables at least once a month.
Page 95
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Page 96
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
. Jer
Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania
Demographics
Jurisdiction:
Population:
Area:
Total Households:
Total Businesses and
Institutions:
Brief Description:
City of Philadelphia
1,633,826 in 1990
136 square miles
673,880 (572,798 single family to 6-family residences and 101,082
households in buildings of seven units or more—ILSR estimate based on
distribution of households in previous years)
26,579 (23,253 commercial businesses and offices, 3326 institutions and
unclassified businesses)
Philadelphia is the fourth largest city in the nation, and the second
largest city on the eastern seaboard. It is a major center for industry,
commerce, oil refineries, and manufacturing. In 1989 the median per
capita income was $10,266, and 862,000 people were employed in the
City.
Page 97
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
Annual Tonnages (July 1989 to June 1990)
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
Disposed
Incinerated
Landfilted
Generated
Public
Sector
57,854
56,283
1,571
870,199
0
870,199
928,053
Private
Sector
181,959
181,959
0
950,120
NA
MA
1,132,079
Total
MSW
239,813
238,242
1,571
1,820,319
NA
NA
2,060,132
Construction
& Demolition
23,588
19,088
4,500
408,096
NA
NA
431,684
Total
Waste
263,401
257,330
6,071
2,228,415
NA
NA
2,491,816
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
6%
6%
Percent by Weight Recovered
16%
16%
0%
12%
12%
5%
4%
11%
10%
Motes: Municipal solid waste cannot be broken down into residential and commercial. Public sector materials recovered include
recyclables collected by City crews from 159,245 single- through six-unit households (approximately one-third of such
households), from community block comer and drop-off programs, and from municipal office buildings as well as leaves collected by
the City. Public sector waste disposed includes residential waste disposed from 572,798 single- through six-unit households,
waste from commercial establishments employing fewer than six employees, and municipal street sweepings.
Private sector materials recovered include recyclables, compostables, and refuse collected by private haulers from multi-unit
residences with seven or more units, commercial businesses, and institutions. Private sector waste disposed also includes 23.224
tons of residential and commercial waste self-hauled to landfills. Commercial waste cannot be broken out from private or public
sector waste, but it is estimated to comprise 60 percent of municipal solid waste generated.
The tonnage of recyclable materials self-hauled to drop-off centers or private scrap yards is not included in this table.
'Less than 1 percent.
Landfill Tipping Fee: $66.25 per ton in 1989, $6956 per ton in 1990
Collection and Disposal
of Refuse:
The Philadelphia Streets Department partitions the City into 6 waste
collection districts, which are subdivided into 13 waste collection regions.
City crews collect refuse once each week from single-family through 6-
unit residences, and from businesses that employ fewer than six people.
There are 5 City-owned transfer stations and 17 private transfer stations.
In 1988 the Streets Department negotiated a 6-year contract with Waste
Management Inc. (WMI) to dispose of its municipal refuse at the
Tulleytown or GROWS landfills in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. In fiscal
year 1990 the City paid $148,260,228 ($170 per ton) for disposal of 870,199
tons including collection, disposal, and maintenance costs. Thirty-nine
private haulers collect waste from apartment buildings with seven or
more units, commercial businesses, institutions, industrial plants, and
construction and demolition sites. Thirty-four percent of privately
collected waste is disposed out of state. A small percentage of this waste
is incinerated.
Page 98
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Total Waste Recovered and Disposed (Percent by Weight, FY1990)
Disposed 89% Recovered 11%
Private Disposed 38%
C&D Disposed 16%
C&D Recovered 1%
Public Recycled 2%
r
Private Recovered 7%
Public Disposed 35%
Mote: Due to rounding, numbers do not add up to 100%.
Materials Recovery Overview
Goals and Legislative
Requirements:
In August 1987 the City of Philadelphia enacted ordinance 1251A, which
established a goal of 50 percent reduction in the waste stream through
recycling and composting by the end of 1991. The law required the
mandatory separation for recovery of newspaper, plastic, glass, aluminum
and ferrous cans, and yard waste, to be phased in citywide over a 2-year
period. In March 1991, Philadelphia lowered its recovery goal to 40
percent of the waste stream by the year 2000.
The Pennsylvania Municipal Waste Planning, Recycling, and Waste
Reduction Act (State Law 101), enacted September 1988, mandates
statewide recycling. All municipalities with populations greater than
10,000 are required to recycle leaves and a minimum of three materials
from a list of recyclables including glass, aluminum and ferrous cans,
newspaper, cardboard, high-grade paper, and plastic. Effective
September 1990, State Law 101 established a goal of recycling 25 percent
of its waste stream by 1997, and required that all counties develop
comprehensive 10-year waste management plans. Philadelphia is a
county as well as a city. Act 101 also prohibits anyone from landfilling
consolidated loads of leaves and lead-acid batteries.
Page 99
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Like many other northeastern cities, Philadelphia faced rapidly rising trash disposal costs in the
1980's. Its disposal costs rose from $85 million to $40 million between 1983 and 1988. The City
administration, determined to find alternatives to landfilling, pushed for construction of a waste
incineration plant in the Philadelphia Navy Yard. The proposal was vehemently opposed by a
coalition of community, environmental, and religious groups. The City Council rejected the plan, and in
June 1987, Philadelphia passed a law that made recycling and composting the primary waste
management strategy. This ordinance, Act 1251A, mandated a goal of recovering 50 percent of the
residential, commercial, and institutional waste streams through recycling and composting. The
ordinance included provisions for setting up educational programs, establishing more than six
intermediate processing centers, developing formulas for determining the avoided disposal costs
through recycling, and implementing appropriate mechanisms for savings such as shared savings or
bonuses. However, this legislation did not provide the funding necessary to achieve these goals. As a
result, in 1991 the City's goal was lowered to recovering 40 percent of the waste stream through
recycling and composting by the year 2000.
The Philadelphia Recycling Office (PRO), a unit of the City's Managing Director's Office, was
established to plan the recycling agenda. The Streets Department is responsible for the collection,
processing, and marketing of municipal recyclables, and for enforcing the recycling law. The City
created two committees, as required by Ordinance 1251A, to guide PRO. The Recycling Advisory
Committee (RAC) includes representatives of private sector recyclers and recycling advocates. The
Inter-Agency Task Force (IATF) is the policy-making body directing the PRO and other City agencies
affected by changes in the recycling programs, including the Streets Department, the Procurement
Department, and the Law Department.
Philadelphia implemented a voluntary pilot curbside program in September 1987. Municipal crews
collected newspaper, glass, and aluminum and ferrous cans every other week from 23,000 households.
National Temple Recycling, a private nonprofit community-based organization, won the bid to process
and market recyclables collected in the first phase of the City's curbside program. In 1988 the program
expanded into weekly collection. In 1989 the program became mandatory when the pilot was expanded
to the entire Sanitation District, which is divided into nine anticipated recycling zones. Two
additional neighborhoods were serviced and plastic beverage containers were added to the list of
materials collected. The Philadelphia Transfer and Recycling Center (PTRC), a subsidiary of Waste
Management Inc., received the recycling contract as the low bidder. In fiscal year 1990, the City
recovered 18,368 tons of recyclables; tonnages recovered increased to 27/441 during fiscal year 1991.
As of 1991 municipal crews service one-third of the city's eligible households, or 28 percent of all
households. Philadelphia's fiscal crisis has stalled further expansion of the curbside program.
Residents not served by the municipal curbside program are encouraged to recycle at City drop-off sites,
private buy-back centers, and drop-off sites run by private community groups.
Municipal curbside leaf collection, implemented in 1978, is conducted in areas of the City with the
highest tree density. Materials are composted at the Fairmount Park Compost Site and used in City
parks or given to Philadelphia residents.
In 1988, to fulfill the requirements of State Act 101, the Mayor appointed 20 members to the
Philadelphia Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) to prepare a Municipal Waste Management
Plan. Completed in 1990 and approved by the City Council in March 1991, this plan recommended a
three-tiered strategy: (1) waste reduction, (2) recycling and composting, and (3) disposal methods,
including landfilling and waste incineration.
Philadelphia is suffering from severe financial problems that have curtailed the growth of the
City's recycling and composting programs. The recycling program is funded directly from the City's
general fund. Recycling revenues go to the general fund rather than to PRO'S budget or the Streets
Department budget. Under State Act 101, counties and municipalities may apply for a variety of State
grants funded through a $2 per ton surcharge on landfill tipping fees. However, State grants do not
provide for an equitable distribution of funds. Although Philadelphia represents 16 percent of the
State's population, Act 101 stipulates that no single municipality may receive more than 10 percent of
total funds targeted for implementation of recycling programs. Moreover, the Pennsylvania
Page 100
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Resources (DER) requires that grant funds be used for education, planning,
program development, and market development expenses. In Philadelphia labor and operating and
maintenance costs comprise most of the recycling and composting budget
Recycling Activities
Public Sector Curbside Recycling
Start-up Date:
Service Provider:
Pick-up Frequency:
Same Day as Refuse:
Sectors Served:
Mandatory:
Participation Rate:
Materials Collected:
Set-out Method:
Collection Method and
Vehicles:
Economic Incentives:
September 1987 for voluntary biweekly pilot program; January 1989 for
weekly mandatory collection
The Philadelphia Streets Department-Sanitation Division.
Approximately 22 private pig farmers collect food waste under contract
with the Streets Department.
Recyclables are collected weekly, food waste is collected biweekly, and
tires and white goods are collected on request
No. Municipal workers collect recyclables on the workday preceding
refuse collection.
115,000 households in buildings with six units or fewer in 1989, and
159,245 such households in 1990. Small businesses are also served.
Yes, for newspaper, glass, aluminum and ferrous cans, and HOPE and PET
plastic beverage containers
80 percent of households served. In 1987 PRO determined an average set-
out weight per household for recyclables. Dividing the total tonnage by
the average set-out weight yields an approximate number of
participating households. The total number of households served is then
divided by the number of participating households to determine an
estimated participation rate.
Newspaper, glass, aluminum and ferrous cans, and HDPE and PET plastic
beverage containers. The Streets Department collects white goods and
tires free of charge on request, and farmers collect food waste.
Residents bundle newspapers or place them in paper bags. They
commingle all other materials in 6-gallon plastic buckets provided free of
charge to each household. Residents may also use any additional
containers. Food waste must be set out in separate 5 or 10-gallon covered
containers provided by residents.
A three-person collection crew collects recyclables in 32-cubic-yard Lodal
trucks, or 23-cubic-yard Eager Beaver, trucks. Commingled materials are
placed in one bin, newspaper in another. When recycling vehicles fail to
operate, City crews collect recyclables in compactor trucks. The Streets
Department uses a 20-cubic-yard open truck to collect tires and white
goods.
None
Page 101
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Enforcement: Although recycling is mandatory, the City does not enforce the law.
While municipal crews can refuse to pick up recyclables set out
improperly at curbside, they rarely do so. Although scavenging occurs in
~:pr Philadelphia, the Gty has not taken any measures to prevent it.
Annual Tonnage 54,304 tons in fiscal year 1990 (18368 tons of recyclables, 2/402 tons of
white goods, 3,534 tons of tires, and 30,000 tons of food waste). In fiscal
year 1991, 27/441 tons of recyclables and 30,000 tons of food waste were
recovered, excluding white goods and tires).
Residential Block Corner Collection
The Queen Village Recycling Committee (QVRC), located in a central Philadelphia neighborhood
and comprising 90 city blocks, initiated a block corner collection program in 1985 to improve the
convenience of recycling for residents over drop-off locations. -The Committee contacted the City's
recycling office and arranged for a Gty track and crew to collect the recyclables. The program combines
the efficiency of a drop-off center with the convenience of curbside collection. Bob Pierson, volunteer
spokesman for the Queen Village Recycling Committee, estimates that the costs of the block comer
program are one-third those of curbside collection.
Residents bring their newspaper, glass, and aluminum cans to designated street corners each
Saturday morning. (In 1990 recyclables were collected every other Saturday.) Over a 3-hour period,
City crews pick up materials from 25 street corners. (The short time materials are left at curbside
reduces the opportunities for scavengers to remove saleable materials.) The two-person crew puts
newspaper into a compactor truck and other materials into a compartmentalized vehicle, such as a
Lodal 3030 or Eager Beaver, Recycler Six. Block corner materials are fully separated at the corner,
including glass separation by color, and require no further separation. Because each corner stop services
30 to 150 homes, the block corner program is highly efficient. In addition, the driver can help load the
recyclables at each stop. About one-third of Queen Village residents live in a public housing project,
and do not yet participate in the program. There are 3,200 households in the Village. Three other
neighborhoods (all smaller than Queen Village) are included in the block comer collection route serving
Queen Village. Together, these neighborhoods collect about 400 tons of recyclables a year. This
tonnage is tracked by receipts provided by the buyers of the materials.
The block corner idea has spread to other Philadelphia neighborhoods. Both high- and low-
income neighborhoods are served. In 1990 recyclables were collected from ten block corner
neighborhoods at an estimated cost of $58 per ton. In 1991 mere are 15 block corner programs operating.
According to Bob Pierson, the block corners have received well-supervised and highly competent
collection services from the City's Sanitation Division of the Streets Department Local organizing and
publicity efforts were all either homegrown or through networking with already established block
corner programs.
Neighborhoods interested in initiating a block corner program establish a network of block
coordinators, arrange collection with the Streets Department, and publicize their programs. Block
coordinators are key to the success of the program. These volunteers are responsible for selecting and
monitoring a corner, and distributing startup and reminder leaflets to the residents on their blocks. The
neighborhood groups work with the City to select buyers for their recyclables. Revenues from material
sales are returned to the community and used to fund neighborhood projects such as early childhood
programs, tree plantings, park planning, and clean-up of vacant lots.
Page 102
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Food Waste Collection
New Jersey hog fanners have collected food waste from Philadelphia's residential and commercial
sectors for more than 80 years. The City has also reimbursed haulers for collection of food waste from
residential households for at least 25 years; in 1989 the City reimbursed haulers $67 per ton. The City
bases fanners' reimbursements on the average weight of a truckload of food waste for a given collection
route. Food waste is weighed approximately once per month.. The Streets Department coordinates
collection routes, and households located in an area extending over three-fourths of the City can receive
food waste collection service. Residents place food waste in 5- or 10-gallon cans with tight-fitting lids.
The City reports no fly or odor problems with its food waste collection program. All types of food waste
are accepted. Before food scraps can be fed to hogs, they must be cooked for 30 minutes at a core
temperature of 212 degrees Fahrenheit. Some of the farmers' vehicles are equipped to cook the food
waste en route. Hogs are usually fed the food scraps the following day. Most farmers currently cook
food waste at their farms.
Commercial establishments such as bakeries, hospitals, and prisons also recycle food waste.
Unused or pre-consumer commercial food waste, such as out-of-date bakery items and produce, does not
need to be cooked. Although some hog farmers feed their hogs entirely on food scraps, the program is
not expected to expand. According to Robert Shisler, president of the New Jersey Livestock Association,
the number of hog farmers has declined due to suburban encroachment and high start-up costs. He
estimates that the number of private food waste haulers has decreased from approximately 100
haulers 15 years ago to 22 haulers in 1991. The tonnage recovered from the residential sector in fiscal
year 1991 decreased somewhat. The Sanitation Division is currently trying to increase residential
participation by advertising food waste routes and collection days.
Office/Institutional Collection
In 1989 seven municipal office buildings implemented a mixed paper recycling program. Staff
disposed of all mixed paper in designated wastepaper baskets. Municipal crews collected the paper
and paid Newman and Company, a paperboard manufacturer, approximately $13 per ton to process the
paper. In February 1991, Waste Management Inc. was awarded a contract to process separated high-
grade paper (and remaining mixed waste) from the seven municipal office buildings.
The Philadelphia Procurement Department's Disposal Unit salvages and reuses numerous items
from other City departments, including typewriters, 55-gallon drums, and copiers. Approximately 60
percent of the Disposal Unit's workload involves re-issue of used equipment. The Department also
recycles items such as light poles involved in auto accidents, street signs, and fire department ladders.
In fall 1990, 25 public schools participated in a 1-year pilot recycling project. The Streets
Department talked with school principals and maintenance personnel about collection procedure.
Waste was separated into two fractions: classroom waste (primarily paper) and lunchroom waste.
Lunchroom waste, which was not solely food waste, was disposed; however, the contents of the
classroom bins were highly contaminated and most materials collected were unusable. This program
was ended and the City is planning another school program slated to begin in November 1991. (See
"Future Solid Waste Management Plans.")
Page 103
-------
Philadelphia, PeimsyZttRfo
Private Sector Curbside/Alley Recycling
Legislative
Requirements:
Service Provider;
Number Served:
Sectors Served:
Materials Collected:
Pick-up Frequency:
Set-out and Collection
Method:
Incentives/Enforcement:
Annual Tonnage:
State Act 101 requires that all commercial and institutional
establishments and all apartments not served by the City implement
recycling programs by September 1990. Such entities are required to
recycle a minimum of high-grade office paper, corrugated cardboard,
aluminum cans, and leaves.
Approximately 76 private haulers based in Philadelphia and numerous
haulers from outside the City
Not available
Commercial, institutional, and industrial establishments including
office buildings, retail stores, restaurants, bars, universities, and
hospitals; apartment buildings with more than six units
Private haulers and recyclers collect materials mandated by State Act
101—high-grade office paper, corrugated cardboard, aluminuimcans,
and leaves—as well as other materials, including mixed paper, ferrous
cans, HDPE and PET food and beverage containers, food waste, yard
waste other than leaves, wood waste, construction and demolition
debris, and tires.
Varies
Depending on the hauler selected, commercial customers either
segregate recyclables by material or set out commingled recyclables.
Private haulers collect recyclables in a variety of containers, including
buckets, cans, hampers, dumpsters, and roll-offs. They load materials
in a variety of vehicles, including compactor trucks and specialized
recycling vehicles.
Although recycling is mandatory in Philadelphia, it is not enforced.
Not available
Many commercial and institutional establishments have implemented in-house recycling programs.
Below one program at a hospital is detailed.
Hospital Recycling Collection Programs
Several Philadelphia hospitals have established recycling programs to reduce the large volume of
waste typically generated at these institutions. The Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
established its recycling program in 1988. Michael Smith, Manager of Environmental Services,
estimates that corrugated cardboard recycling alone has decreased the volume of the hospital's
disposed waste by 20 percent. Thirty-five departments, including the pharmacy, nursery, and
laboratories, participate in the program under the supervision of an area coordinator. The hospital
recycles corrugated cardboard, office and computer paper, clear glass, and aluminum cans. Janitors
wheel full bins (mail carts) of materials to central storage rooms in the hospital's basement.
Corrugated cardboard is brought directly to a compactor at the loading dock area, where haulers pick it
up three times per week. The hospital contracts with three haulers to take the recyclables to vendors,
who pay the hospital only for its high-grade office paper. Because haulers are typically
apprehensive about receiving contaminated loads, the hospital must be extremely careful to keep all
Page 104
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
other hospital wastes out of the recyclables. In August 1991, the hospital will add ferrous cans,
polystyrene, polypropylene, PET, and HOPE plastic containers to its recycling program. Jefferson
Hospital, which also has an extensive recycling program, has purchased specialized recycling
containers.
Drop-off Centers
Number and Type
Public or Private:
Sectors Served:
Materials Accepted:
Annual Tonnage
32. The City operates two municipal drop-off sites. Philadelphia
community groups operate four drop-off sites, of which three are buy-back
centers. Twenty-six private recyclers accept or buy recyclables. In 1990
PRO purchased 60 igloos, and an additional 40 were donated, to collect
materials at sites throughout the city. Four igloos are placed at each site
for collection of clear, green, and brown glass, and aluminum cans. The
igloos were initially set up at six sites throughout the Philadelphia Park
System; however, two of the sites have been dosed due to Fairmount Park
opposition. In 1991 the City set up 11 igloo sites at fire stations and 3 sites
at City transfer stations.
Public and private
Community group and municipal drop-off sites service residents who do
not receive municipal curbside collection. Private recyclers service both
the residential and the commercial/institutional sectors.
Newspaper, glass, and aluminum cans are accepted at the two municipal
sites. At 11 drop-off sites, community recycling groups collect primarily
newspaper, glass, and aluminum cans. Some community recycling groups
also accept corrugated cardboard, high-grade paper, computer paper,
magazines, and thrift store items. Three groups collect only aluminum
cans.
In addition to these materials, private recyclers collect nonferrous and
ferrous metals, lead-acid batteries, tires, yard waste, and construction
and demolition debris such as concrete, wood pallets, asphalt, and brick.
Pep Boys and other service stations accept motor oil.
1,118 tons were collected through the two City drop-off sites and seven of
the City-assisted community drop-off programs in fiscal year 1990. This
tonnage includes recyclables collected from the block corner programs.
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables
The Streets Department delivers approximately 40 tons per day of newspaper and commingled
recyclables from municipal collection to two privately owned and operated regional facilities that also
serve curbside programs outside of Philadelphia: the Philadelphia Transfer and Recycling Center
(PTRC) and The Forge. Collection crews delivered 9,859 tons to the PTRC and 9,632 tons to The Forge in
fiscal year 1990. Both are subsidiaries of Waste Management Inc. In 1989 Philadelphia received $5.08
per ton from The Forge for recyclables ($2 per ton in 1991), and paid $30 per ton for materials brought to
the PTRC ($20 per ton in 1991).
The Forge and the PTRC each have a capacity to process 100 tons per day, and currently process
approximately 75 tons per day. Thirty-five employees work at each facility. Up until 1991 The Forge,
Page 105
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
which collects recyclables from the northeast section of Philadelphia, delivered its recydables to the
PTRC. Currently Hie Forge processes recyclables collected through the City's program and by private
haulers. Both processing centers utilize a similar processing system. At the PTRC, which began
operations in July 1989, all glass is passed through a vibrating screen; broken glass drops out and is sold
as mixed glass cullet Pickers remove green and amber glass; clear glass remains on the main conveyor
belt. Magnets pull ferrous metals out from the aluminum cans. Newspaper is baled. HOPE and PET
plastics are baled together. Approximately 13 percent by weight of curbside materials brought to the
PTRC are landfilled as residue. The Forge, which operated as a transfer station in 1985, began to
process corrugated cardboard and newspaper in 1986. In 1991 The Forge began processing commingled
glass, plastic, and cans collected through residential curbside programs.
Some of the recyclable materials is shipped overseas, while some is sold to local markets. The
PTRC exports some of its baled newspaper to Europe and the Far East and sells some directly to local
paper mills. In 1989 the mixed paper collected from municipal offices was processed into paperboard by
a local manufacturer, Newman and Company. Plastics are sold to Dupont and further processed at the
Plastics Recycling Alliance, a joint Dupont and WMI venture located in Philadelphia.
Recyclables collected through the municipal drop-off sites and the City-assisted community and
block corner programs are processed and marketed by National Temple Recycling, Container
Corporation of America, Philadelphia Recycling Inc., and NAPA Recycling. The Highway
Department recycles asphalt from City sidewalks and streets for new road construction. Whole tires
collected through the municipal program are recycled by Domino Salvage into crumb rubber to be used
for road aggregate and as a bulking agent for compost processing. The City pays Domino $60 per ton to
take the crumb rubber. Manzi Metals pays the Streets Department for white goods collected through
the municipal program. Appliances are disassembled, bundled, and sent overseas or to local markets.
Most private construction and demolition debris is processed at two facilities inside the Gty and by
ten similar businesses outside the City. One large Philadelphia recyder, Winzinger Recycling, began
to recycle construction and demolition debris in 1985. The company processes and sells yard waste, wood
waste, concrete, asphalt, and brick as recycled construction and landscaping materials.
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement
Philadelphia's mandatory recycling law has helped to attract new businesses to the area and to
expand existing businesses. Companies taking advantage of the supply of secondary materials include
recycling brokers such as Paper Recycling, Inc., a plastics processing company, Plastics Recycling
Alliance, and a manufacturer of plastic lumber, Rivinite Corp.
The Philadelphia Recycling Office is working with the Philadelphia Industrial Development
Corporation (PIDC), community activists, and recycling entrepreneurs to stimulate economic
development through recycling. At least 35 recycling companies have started up or expanded
operations in the Greater Philadelphia area since 1986. PRO estimates that approximately 350 people
in Philadelphia were employed by private recycling companies in 1991.
One PRO staff member works on local market development and researches new export markets for
local brokers. PRO is currently assembling a data base of information for use by Philadelphia
industries. The office plans to create an industrial waste exchange program and an educational program
on secondary materials substitution.
Philadelphia's recycling ordinance requires municipal procurement of products containing
recycled materials. The City allows a 10 percent price preference for recycled products. This change
has enabled manufacturers and distributors of recycled content office paper to compete in the bid
process.
Page 106
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Composting Activities
During 2 months of the year, the Philadelphia Streets Department assigns Sanitation Division
crew members to pick up leaves from the four residential areas with the heaviest leaf concentrations.
Nine of the 13 districts serviced by the Gty receive some yard waste collection. Collection crews spend
approximately 2 weeks in each district. To ensure that residents rake their leaves to the curb, the Gty
advertises leaf collection schedules in the local papers and informs citizen groups of leaf collection
days.
Backyard Composting
In 1991 PRO received a $90,000 grant from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources to fund a master composting program. The program, conducted by the Pennsylvania State
Cooperative Extension Service, will train a total of 75 master composters to teach backyard composting
techniques to residents. The first class of 15 master composters graduated in April 1991. The City also
plans to establish several permanent demonstration sites in the City, but does not have plans to give out
bins.
Curbside Collection
Start-up Date:
Service Provider:
Households Served:
Materials Collected:
Mandatory:
Set-out Method:
Collection Vehicles and
Method:
Collection Frequency:
Economic Incentives:
Annual Tonnage:
1978 for leaves (1985 for Christmas trees)
Philadelphia Streets Department-Sanitation Division
Philadelphia collects leaves in the four residential neighborhoods
(45,000 households) considered to have the highest tree density in the
City.
Leaves and Christmas trees
Recovery of leaves is mandatory, as stated in Pennsylvania Act 101;
recovery of Christmas trees is voluntary.
Residents rake loose leaves to the curb.
City crews ranging from three to five persons collect leaves by one of two
methods. In the first method, crews sweep leaves together with
mechanical brooms, vacuum them into hoppers, and dump them into a pile
at curbside. Leaves are loaded into a 20-cubic-yard compactor truck with
a front-end loader. The second method employs leaf loaders to vacuum up
leaves and blow them into a 65-cubic-yard trailer pulled by a tractor.
Christmas trees are collected in open trucks.
Leaves are collected at least once from each of the four neighborhoods
during the November through December collection period.
None
1,571 in FY1990 (1,006 tons of leaves and 565 tons of Christmas trees)
Page 107
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Composting Site
Municipal crews bring leaves collected from residential neighborhoods to the Fail-mount Park
Compost Site. The leaves are combined with manure from the Philadelphia Zoo and the City's police
horses. (Landscapers' waste was accepted at the site until July 1989. At that time, construction to
expand the site began, and the new site did not have space for landscapers' materials.) Manure and
yard waste are first stored separately because the 200-by-200-yard concrete composting pad cannot
accommodate all the materials at one time. As space on the pad becomes available, operators add
leaves and manure to form new windrows. Compost is turned once a week, and the process is complete in
approximately 4 months. Finished compost is tested approximately once a year for heavy metals. City
residents and private landscapers may take finished compost free of charge. Park crews also deliver
compost to public and community gardens, Philadelphia prisons, and private contractors. None of the
yard waste delivered is rejected as noncompostable.
The Streets Department is funding an expansion of the Fairmount Park Compost Site to
accommodate residential leaves collected through the curbside program. The Department completed
the first phase of these site improvements in October 1990. The pad was doubled in size, regraded, and
blacktopped. Eight large irrigation guns were purchased to shoot streams of water into the compost
windrows. In 1991 PRO allocated $370,125 to purchase composting equipment, including a new front-end
loader and windrow turner.
From 1986 through 1989, City crews brought Christmas trees to the Fairmount Park Compost Site for
chipping. By 1990 the City could no longer afford to operate and maintain equipment and to pay its
staff overtime, so it contracted Waste Management Inc. to chip the trees at the Tulleytown or GROWS
landfill.
Page 108
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
Material
Newspaper
Corrugated Cardboard
High-grade Paper
Glass*
HOPE & PET Plastic*
Aluminum Cans*
Ferrous Cans*
Commingled Materialst
Appliances/White Goods
Other Metal
Food Waste
Tires
Motor Oil*
Subtotal MSW Recycled
Leaves
Christmas Trees
Subtotal MSW Composted§
Total MSW Recovered
Asphalt
Other**
Total C&D Recycled
Wood Waste
Total C&D Composted
Total C&D Recovered
Total Materials Recycled
Total Materials Composted
Total Materials Recovered
MSW Public
Sector
(Tons, 89-90)
11,400
0
861
5,126
561
240
1,041
1,118
2,402
NA
30,000
3,534
NA
56,283
1,006
565
1,571
57,854
—
-
-
_
-
-
56,283
1,571
57,854
MSW Private
Sector
(Tons, 89-90)
130
155,000
19,800
NA
NA
NA
NA
130
NA
4,650
NA
2,249
NA
181,959
NA
NA
NA
181,959
—
-
-
—
-
-
181,959
0
181,959
Other
(Tons, 89-90)
—
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
—
—
—
-
1,188
17,900
19,088
4,500
4,500
23,588
19,088
4,500
23,588
Total
(Tons, 89-90)
11,530
155,000
20,661
5,126
561
240
1,041
1,248
2,402
4,650
30,000
5,783
NA
238,242
1,006
565
1,571
239,813
1,188
17,900
19,088
4,500
4,500
23,588
257,330
6,071
263,401
Notes: Tonnage figures provided above are marketed tonnages for fiscal year 1990 (July 1989 to June 1990).
Some recydables are self-hauled to private drop-off sites or scrap yards. This tonnage is not available from the City and is not
included above.
'Publicly collected glass, plastic, aluminum cans, and ferrous cans are collected and weighed commingled. Listed tonnage
breakdowns were estimated by the PTRC in April 1990. Tonnages for public sector programs do not add up to total due to rounding.
tPublic sector commingled materials include newspaper, glass, aluminum cans, and high-grade paper generated through the public
drop-off centers, the block comer programs, and the City-assisted community drop-off programs. Private sector commingled
materials include glass, ferrous and aluminum cans, and PET and HOPE plastics. A breakdown of these materials is not available.
$Motor oil is collected throughout the City; however, tonnages are not available.
§Leaves are not weighed. Tonnage figures are estimated by the City, based on the total number of trucks delivering leaves to the
composting site.
"Other C&D includes asphalt, concrete, brick, and cinder blocks.
Page 109
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Publicity and Education
Residential
Philadelphia's population is extremely diverse both culturally and economically. Forty percent of
residents are functionally illiterate or do not read English. The Philadelphia Recycling Office utilizes
a variety of techniques to inform City residents of recycling requirements and programs. PRO'S
newsletter (PRO file) announces program events, highlighting changes in the recycling and composting
programs. PRO prints educational materials, including a listing of recycling opportunities for single-
family and multi-unit residences not serviced with municipal curbside collection. Through newspaper
ads, billboards, public service announcements, presentations, and utility bill inserts, PRO spreads its
recycling message. PRO circulars placed in residents' recycling buckets use graphics and pictures to
explain recycling requirements. Recycling vehicles are painted red to stand out from the standard
yellow trash trucks.
Commercial/Institutional
The Philadelphia Recycling Office is currently offering publications and technical assistance to
help businesses develop recycling programs. (The commercial sector generates an estimated 60 percent
of the City's municipal waste stream.) PRO compiled a Commercial Recycling Quick Reference that
lists recycling buy-back centers, drop-off centers, and haulers. In addition, it has published three
guides for commercial and institutional establishments on how to set up recycling programs. Two of the
guides are geared toward commercial businesses; the other is written for managers of apartments and
condominium buildings.
PRO has organized a number of business-specific informational exchanges to promote recycling. The
Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce set up a meeting of PRO staff with Center City business
representatives to encourage recycling efforts in retail establishments. PRO also sponsored a hospital
recycling roundtable at which nearly all of Philadelphia's b rals were represented.
Working with the Philadelphia Industrial Developme Corporation, community activists, and
local recycling entrepreneurs, PRO is helping to establish local recycling processing and buy-back
centers in economically depressed parts of the City. Together with the Waste Recyclers Organization,
an umbrella organization of private recyclers in Philadelphia, PRO has organized workshops for
recycling companies on financing opportunities and preparation of bid proposals for City recycling
contracts.
Page 110
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Economics
Costs Coven The Recycling Office does not have its own budget and is funded through the
general fund. Listed costs include capital and operating and maintenance (O&M)
costs for recycling collection from 159,245 households in residential buildings with
six units or fewer (18368 tons). Listed costs to process recydables delivered to the
PTRC and The Forge, and contract fees paid to hog farmers for the collection of
30,000 tons of food waste are also included. Some composting costs are included
under O&M costs but the public collection of residential white goods (2/402 tons),
tires (3,534 tons), the municipal paper program (861 tons), collection of 1,006 tons
of leaves and 565 tons of Christmas trees are not available.
Capital costs for processing recyclables are unavailable, since these activities
occur in the private sector. Capital costs for public leaf collection are also
unavailable. The Streets Department has a large fleet of equipment used for
various Streets Department activities, and vehicles are not designated
specifically for yard waste collection. The equipment listed below for leaf
collection represents the type and number of vehicles needed for this collection.
Compost processing equipment was procured through the Procurement
Department, and some purchase prices are not available.
Capital Costs: Collection
Item
21 32-cubic-yard Lodal Trucks
@ $30,500
80,366 6-gallon Buckets
@ $3.57
13 23-cubic-yard Eager
Beaver Trucks @ $16,610
7 15-cubic-yard Trucks
@ $15,714
40-cubic-yard Tractor Trailer
60 Igloos @ $800
98,621 6-gallon buckets
<§> $3.78
2 Vacuum Leaf Loaders
6 Tractors and Trailers*
2 Large Loaders*
10 Mechanical Brooms*
20-cubic-yard Compactor*
Cost
$640,500
286,907
215,930
110,000
80,000
48,000
372,787
12,000
NA
NA
NA
NA
Use
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Recycling
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Composting
Year Incurred
1989
1989
1990
1990
1990
1990
1990
1982
NA
NA
NA
NA
Mote City equipment was purchased through the leasing authority (a City government department). The City sold bonds at 8 to 9
percent interest to pay for the equipment
'The Streets Department has a large fleet of equipment used for various Streets Department activities; it assigns the equipment
listed above on a daily basis for leaf collection. Vehicles are not designated specifically for yard waste collection.
Page 111
-------
PhQadelphv
Capital Costs; Processing
Item
Fiat Front-end Loaders*
Cobey Windrow Composter*
Cost
NA
NA
Use
Composting
Composting
Year Incurred
1976
1978
'Compost processing equipment was procured through the Procurement Department Purchase prices are not available.
Annual and Per Ton Operating and Maintenance Costs (FY1990)
Recycling Subtotal*
Collection
Municipal Curbside Collection!
Food Waste Collection and Processing*
Processing§
Administration"
Education/Publicity
Composting Subtotal
Collection
Processingtt
Administration
Education/Publicity
Cost
$6,114,510
$5,181,439
3,177,800
2,003,639
154,121
670,950
108,000
NA
NA
$90.000
10,000
0
Tons Covered
48,368
18,368
30,000
18,368
18,368
18,368
1,006
1,006
1,006
1,006
1,006
Per Ton Cost
$158
$107
173
67
8
37
6
NA
NA
$89
10
0
Notes: Total costs for recycling and composting are not available. O&M costs listed above represent only a portion of the City's
program expenses.
* Some administrative costs incurred by the Streets Department are excluded. The per ton recycling cost of $158 is calculated by
adding per ton collection costs to per ton costs of processing, administration, and education/publicity.
tFY 1990 labor costs for curbside recycling collection totalled $2,977,158 including benefits. Collection crew members earn $9.50
per hour. By July 1991 the curbside recycling cost decreased to $168 per ton.
^Philadelphia reimburses hog farmers $66.78 per ton to collect food waste from City residents. The City estimates that it recovered
approximately 30,000 tons in 1990.
Scontract fee paid to WW for processing recyclabtes at the PTRC (based on $30 per ton fee) and at The Forge (the City received
$5.08 per ton).
"Recycling Office administrative costs given above cover the curbside recycling program alone. Of these costs, $472,500 was
spent in wages; an additional 42 percent of this ($198,450) was paid in fringe benefits. The Streets Department administrative
expenses are not included.
^Approximate salary °* fa™* employees at Fairmount Park Composting Site. (This figure excludes fuel and other maintenance
costs tor composting.)
In December 1990, PRO compiled a list of recommendations to the Streets Department on reducing
recycling operating and maintenance costs and increasing productivity. The Philadelphia Recycling
Office suggested that the Streets Department (1) have City collection crews leave the sanitation
yard one-half hour earlier each morning, (2) establish collection standards for recycling vehicle
based on the volume capacity of the vehicle, (3) replace compactor trucks with recycling vehicles,
Page 112
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
and (4) increase participation in the northwest area of the City, which has been identified as
having a low participation rate. In November 1991, PRO released a second report evaluating the
City's options for expanding residential recycling services. These include expanding the efficiency
of the current system, and adopting a co-collection program.
Materials Revenues: $36,051 in fiscal 1990 from materials processed at The Forge. Compost
materials are not sold.
Source of Funding: .Funds are appropriated from City taxes (via the Managing Director's
office budget) and State grants.
Full-time Employees: 115 (Approximately 100 City employees collect recyclables at curbside; 3
people work at the Fairmount Park Composting Site; and 12 people work
at the Philadelphia Recycling Office.)
Part-time Employees: 27 (assigned full-time to leaf collection from November through
December)
Future Solid Waste Management Plans
Due to its budget crisis, the City has curtailed plans to expand Philadelphia's recycling and
composting programs to cover the remaining two-thirds of its single to six family residences that
currently do not receive curbside service. Based on the fact that the cost of recycling has come within
the range of trash collection, the City plans to expand curbside service to one additional neighborhood
in Spring 1992. In an effort to keep costs down, the Sanitation Department will switch three refuse
crews servicing this neighborhood to recycling collection. Although the first phase of the Fairmount
Park Compost Site improvement project has been completed, the second phase has been put on hold.
The total cost, estimated at $2,100,000, was to be funded through State grants and appropriations from
the City budget. The project included plans to establish an on-site recycling center, improve the access
road, and construct a building for the truck scale.
In November 1991, the City implemented a district-wide school recycling program in 276
administration and school buildings. Funding for the program is provided through Energy
Conservation, a School District program. Aluminum cans, newspaper, high-grade and mixed paper
(including magazines and note pads), and corrugated cardboard are collected in containers provided by
each school. Students and staff place aluminum cans in bins located in lounges and and cafeterias;
cardboard is collected in shipping and receiving areas; and paper is collected in labelled wastebaskets
in each classroom and office. Training sessions were provided to maintenance staff and handouts were
sent to all students and administrative staff. BFI, under contract, collects recyclables and provides each
building with a dumpster ranging in size from 2 to 8 cubic yards. Workers deliver the recyclables to
BFI's processing center in King of Prussia, PA. BFI charges each school between $25 and $35 for
collection and processing. If the market for a recyclable material increases above a designated figure,
schools will receive a rebate from BFI, credited towards their next bill. In addition, Energy
Conservation will distribute its surplus funds to the schools, based on tonnages recovered through each
school.
Page 113
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contacts
Michael Harvey
Materials Procurement Office
Philadelphia Transfer and Recycling Center
3605 Grays Ferry Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19146
Phone (215) 467-2000 l
-.vas;
Tom Klein
Director of Education and Promotion
Philadelphia Recycling Office^
870 Municipal Services Building
Philadelphia, PA 19102-1683
Phone (215) 686-5586
Fax (215) 686-5455
Sam Lybrand
General Manager
The Forge, Inc. - >
Milnor and Bleigh Aves.
Philadelphia, PA 19136
Phone (215)335-0330
Robert Shisler
President
New Jersey Livestock Association
Fox Run Rd.
Box 338, RD 4
Sewell, NJ 08080
Phone (609) 468-6915
Mjenzi Traylor
National Temple Recycling Center
1201 W. Glenwood Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19133
Phone (215) 787-2760
Seymour Kasinetz
Sanitation Program Coordinator
Roger Lansbury
Garbage Collection Supervisor
Streets Department
840 Municipal Services Blvd.
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Phone (215) 686-5520
Jay Levin
Recycling Manager -•
Fail-mount Park Composting Site
West Park
Philadelphia, PA 19131
Phone (215) 685-0109
Robert Pierson, President
Queen Village Neighborhood Association
CH2M Hill
1216 Arch St.
Philadelphia, PA 19017
Phone (215) 563-4220
Michael Smith
Manager of Resources and Special Projects
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Phone (213) 662-2584
Steve Tilney
Acting Director of Planning
Philadelphia Recycling Office
870 Municipal Services Building
Philadelphia, PA 19102-1683
Phone (215) 686-5513
Fax (215) 686-5455
Page 114
-------
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
References
"Anything Goes in Philly." World Wastes, January 1991.
Dezzi, Alfred. "The Philadelphia Story: Recycling in an Urban Environment." Solid Waste and
Power, February 1989.
Hoskins, Alexander. "Philadelphia's Comprehensive Solid Waste Plan." Public Works Magazine,
April 1991.
Killam Associates. "City of Philadelphia: Draft Municipal Waste Management Plan." Volumes I, II,
and IV, October 1990.
Klein, Tom. Commercial Recycling,. Biocycle East Coast Conference, April 1991.
Philadelphia Recycling Office. PRO File February, April, July, and September 1990.
Philadelphia Recycling Office. "Recycling at Work: Profiles of Commercial Recycling." July 1990.
Philadelphia Recycling Office. "Recycling in Philadelphia." N.d.
Pierson, Bob. The Block Corner Pickup Handbook, 1988.
Stevens, Barbara (President, Ecodata). Personal communication, March 1991.
US. Environmental Protection Agency. "EPA Recycling Works!" Office of Solid Waste, January 1989.
Page 115
-------
Portland, Oregon
Page 116
-------
Portland, Oregon
Portland,
Oregon
Demographics
Jurisdiction: City of Portland
Population:
Area:
Total Households:
Total Businesses and
Institutions:
Brief Description:
440,000 in 1990
138 square miles
201,900 in 1989 (154,117 in one- to four-family homes, and 47,783 in
buildings with five or more units)
569 institutions in the City, 50325 businesses in the five-county area
The Portland metropolitan area is comprised of five separate counties,
one of which is located in Washington State. Manufacturing is one of the
largest sectors of the economy, with more than 3,300 manufacturing
companies in the Portland area. Portland is a growing high technology
center, and its port handles the largest volume of exports of any on the
West Coast. Large employers include the retailer Fred Meyer, Inc.,
Legacy Health Systems (a nonprofit health care provider), Oregon
Health Services University, and Tektronix, Inc. Lumber and wood product
manufacturing is also a major industry. There are numerous parks in
Portland and many nearby opportunities for outdoor recreation; the City
has been recognized by national magazines as having an especially high
quality of life. The City's 1989 median disposable household income was
$23,238, and per capita income in the Portland metropolitan area was
$16,446 in 1989.
Page 117
-------
Portland, Oregon
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
Annual Tonnages (1990)*
Recovered
Recycled*
Composted
Disposed
Incinerated
Landfilled
Generated
Residential
NA
NA
J NA
NA
1 NA
NA
NA
Commercial/
Institutional
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Total
MSW
199,749
180,695
19,054
412,945
0
412,945
612,694
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
Percent by Weight Recovered
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
33%
29%
3%
More; Due to rounding, numbers may not appear to add to total.
'Tonnages for the City of Portland listed above were calculated by the City Recycling Office based on per capita averages for the
Metro region. Metro does not track MSW separately as residential and commercial/institutional material, nor does it track C&D
waste generated or recovered. MSW includes bulky items such as white goods and wooden pallets but excludes tires and
construction debris. Of all the construction and demolition debris generated in the City of Portland in 1990, 19,468 tons were
disposed. A small amount of construction debris generated in 1990 was recovered, but this tonnage was not tracked.
tlndudes 13,908 tons of deposit containers.
Transfer Station Tipping
Fee:
Refuse Collection and
Disposal:
$16.70 per ton in 1987, $47.99 per ton in 1988, $4835 per ton in 1989, $5635
per ton in 1990, and $68.00 per ton in 1991. Self-haul customers are
charged a minimum of $15 per load; beginning in 1991, the per ton charge
was $55 for self-haul customers.
In 1990 Portland's residential refuse was collected by 89 different private
haulers. These haulers operate with minimal regulatory oversight
(although they must be permitted), and no government-established rate
structure. Collectively, these haulers serve 131,000 residential
households—equivalent to approximately 85 percent of residences in one-
to four-unit buildings, or approximately two-thirds of total households.
Private haulers charge households an average of $12 per month for
weekly collection of one 32-gallon can, and approximately $22 for set-out
of two cans. This fee includes the collection cost for both refuse and
recyclables. Residents in the remaining buildings with one to four units
self-haul their refuse to the transfer stations or landfill. Residential
curbside collection services only households in buildings up to four units.
Waste from residential buildings with more than four units is considered
commercial waste by the City.
Page 118
-------
Portland, Oregon
Municipal Solid Waste Recovered and Disposed (Percent by Weight, 1990)
Disposed 67%
Recovered 33%
MS W Disposed 67%
MSW Recycled 27%
MSW Composted 3%
Deposit Containers Recycled 2%
Note: Due to rounding, numbers do not add to 100%.
Refuse Collection and
Disposal (cont'd):
The majority of the residential waste collected in 1990 was either brought
to a local transfer station or disposed of directly at the St. John's
Landfill, a general-purpose landfill inside city limits. In 1991 the
landfill closed and Portland began shipping its waste to the Columbia
Ridge Landfill, a large regional facility 168 miles east of Portland. A
second transfer station was opened in 1991. A small amount of waste was
sent to the Riverbend Landfill in McMinnville, Oregon. Construction
debris is taken to the Hillsboro Landfill for disposal.
In April 1991, Portland opened the largest operating municipal solid
waste (MSW) composting facility in the nation. The facility will process
600 tons per day (185,000 tons per year) of mixed waste. The tipping fee at
the new facility is $68 per ton. Portland will be delivering 148,000 tons
per year—80 percent of its total feedstock—to the new facility.
Page 119
-------
Portland, Oregon
Materials Recovery Overview
Goals and Legislative
In 1983 the Oregon legislate e adopted the Recycling Opportunity Act,
which requires that curbside collection of recyclable materials be
provided in municipalities with populations of at least 4,000. It also
• cons requires recycling depots at all disposal sites, and sets minimum recycling
-- education and promotion requirements. The State is divided into
"wastesheds," or waste generation areas. Materials required to be
recycled are defined by the State for each wasteshed according to the
availability of markets.
Refuse collectors in the City of Portland have been required by State and
City regulations to offer their customers collection of eight different
recyclable materials since 1987. Citizen participation in this recycling
program is voluntary. The regional government, the Metropolitan Service
District (Metro), is responsible for solid waste planning in a three-county
area that includes Portland. In 1989 Metro set a waste reduction goal of 56
percent to be met by 2010. In September 1988, the State Environmental
Quality Commission identified yard waste as a principal recyclable
material in the Metro region and required local governments to submit a
yari waste recovery plan to the State. Metro completed a regional yard
waste recovery plan in January 1991. Portland haulers will be required to
collect yard debris, including grass dippings, garden trimmings, and
leaves as of April 1992.
In 1991 the Oregon legislature added to the existing recycling legislation
with the passage of Senate Bill 66. The new law sets a 50 percent
recycling goal for the State by the year 2000 and a 45 percent goal for the
Portland metropolitan area by 1995. Only 5 percent of the recycling goal
can be met through MSW composting in the Metro region. The bill also set
minimum standards for recycling programs.
Recycling has long enjoyed public support in the City of Portland and the State of Oregon, hi 1971
Oregon became the first state to adopt a container deposit system, requiring a 5-cent deposit on most
carbonated beverage containers. The public returns over 90 percent of the aluminum, glass, and plastic
deposit containers. Based on a State annual per capita recovery rate for deposit containers of 0.032 tons,
Portland calculates that it recovered 13,908 tons of deposit containers in 1990. Oregon also became the
first stale to legislate recycling when it passed the 1983 Recycling Opportunity Act. Refuse collectors in
the City of Portland have been required by State and City laws to offer their customers collection of
eight different recyclable materials since 1987. Haulers must offer a minimum service of weekly
newspaper collection and monthly curbside collection of glass containers, tin cans, corrugated cardboard,
aluminum, ferrous and nonferrous metals, and used motor oil. Office paper is collected from commercial
accounts. All materials are segregated by type for collection. Drop-off centers also play an important
role in the recovery of materials in Portland. It is estimated that nearly 90 percent of residential
materials recovered are brought to drop-off sites. Presently there are 147 recycling drop-off centers in
the greater Portland metropolitan area. Most of these are single material drop-off sites; only a few
sites accept a full range of materials.
Promotion is a key element of the City's recycling program, since participation in source-separation
programs is currently voluntary. The City coordinates a variety of activities, including media
advertising, promotional events, promotional literature, classroom programs, and presentations to
citizen groups.
Page 120
-------
Portland, Oregon
Portland recovered 24 percent of its 442,000 tons of waste through recycling and its container deposit
system in 1987. In 1990 it generated 612,694 tons of waste, of which 33 percent was recovered through
recycling, composting, and bottle bill redemptions.
Sunflower Recycling Cooperative is a model, small recycling and refuse business operating in
Portland. In 1990, it collected refuse, recyclables, yard waste, and food waste from residential
customers; refuse and recyclables from commercial customers, and also ran a drop-off site. Founded in
the early 1970's, Sunflower serviced 1,100 households with refuse and recycling collection in 1989, and
approximately 1,600 residential households by the end of 1990. Of these customers, approximately 7
percent received weekly pick up of food waste. According to Sunflower, 7 percent of its residential
refuse customers receive refuse pick up only once per month, and an estimated 25 percent of residential
customers who receive all services have reduced their refuse disposal to approximately 30 percent of
their total waste generated.
Beginning in February 1992, Portland will restructure and standardize its residential curbside
recycling program in order to increase its recycling rates. Haulers offering residential refuse service
will be franchised to provide waste collection services. Previously haulers operated under a free
market system and multiple haulers serviced the same neighborhoods. The City believes that the
lack of uniform collection days, weekly collection, and recycling containers has hindered residents'
participation in curbside recycling programs. Under the new plan, haulers will be assigned a
franchised area and will be required to offer weekly curbside collection of recyclables on the same day
as garbage pick-up. The City will provide two 14-gallon containers to each garbage service customer for
set out of recyclable materials. Garbage collection rates under the new system will be regulated. The
City will fund administration, education, and promotion of its recycling program by charging haulers a
5 percent franchise fee on gross revenue earned from residential refuse fees. The new residential
recycling program will cost the City an estimated $1.1 million with an additional $450,000 to purchase
recycling containers. In addition to the eight recyclable materials they must pick up currently, haulers
will also be required to collect HOPE milk jugs and magazines. Haulers will be required to offer a
special rate for a "mini-can" and other variable refuse can rates. Under the new system, however,
haulers with fewer than 3,000 customers will be required to offer curbside collection of recyclable
materials by entering into a cooperative venture with other small haulers. As a result, some smaller
recycling/refuse haulers will provide collection of garbage only, while recycling service is provided by
the cooperative. Prior to 1989, 113 different private haulers collected refuse and recyclables from
Portland's households. Due a large number of mergers and sales, 89 haulers serviced Portland in 1990,
and by February 1992, this number will decline to 69.
In January 1989 the City passed Ordinance 161573, which bans certain polystyrene foam containers
and establishes a public/private task force to reduce disposable plastic products in landfills and
incinerators.
The Metropolitan Services District has recently completed construction of a large-scale municipal
solid waste composting facility located in Portland, which is designed to handle 600 tons per day, or
185,000 tons per year. The facility began accepting material in April 1991. A "put or pay" provision
obligates Metro to deliver (or pay for) a minimum of 185,000 tons per year (maximum 800 tons per day)
of municipal solid waste to the facility. Metro estimates that this is approximately 50 percent of the
residential waste generated in the area.
The program described in the following case study, by and large, represents recycling activities in
the base year 1990. References to program changes in 1991 are interspersed in certain sections of the
report. The final section, Future Solid Waste Management Plans, further details future changes to
Portland's recycling and composting program.
Page 121
-------
Portland, Oregon
Recycling Activities
Residential Curb side Recycling
Start-up Date:
Service Provider:
Pick-up Frequency:
Same Day as Refuse:
Households Served:
Mandatory:
Participation Rate:
Materials Collected:
Set-out Method:
Collection Method and
Vehicles:
Economic Incentives:
Enforcement:
Annual Tonnage
June 1987 for dtywide programs. (Some individual hauler-operated
programs began before this tune.)
89 private waste haulers in 1990
Weekly for newspaper and at least once a month for other recydables
Vanes
131,000 (in one- to four-unit buildings)
Haulers must provide service, but participation by residents is voluntary.
33 percent in 1990 (based on a weighted average from weekly and monthly
programs and excluding those who set out only newspaper). Participation
in weekly collection programs averaged 57 percent, while participation
in the monthly collection program was 23 percent
Newspaper, glass containers, tin cans, corrugated cardboard, aluminium,
ferrous metal, other scrap metal, and used motor oil are required to be
collected. Some haulers, voluntarily collect other materials, such as
HOPE milk jugs or mixed waste paper.
All haulers request that materials be separated by material type in
paper bags or other re-usable containers. Glass must be color-sorted. Tin
cans are placed in one container, aluminum in another. Newspaper is
bundled. Plastic milk Jugs are placed in one container. Some haulers offer
their customers 14-gallon recycling containers.
Haulers use a variety of compartmentalized recycling vehicles. These
include state-of-the-art compartmentalized vehicles,
compartmentalized trailers pulled behind pick-up trucks, and retrofitted
vehicles, as well as side boxes and bumper boxes on garbage trucks.
Sunflower Recycling Cooperative, for example, paid $10,000 to retrofit a
step van with 11 compartments or bins that are easily emptied with a
forklift. Some haulers have on-board plastic compactors. An average of
two crew members operate vehicles.
No discounts are offered to residents who recycle. Residents can reduce
the cost of refuse disposal through recycling by down-sizing their refuse
containers or reducing pick-up frequency.
Penalties are issued to haulers for various infractions, including failure to
provide collection services to residential customers, failure to submit the
required monthly report to the City, failure to respond to consumers'
inquiries regarding recycling, or mixing separated recyclables with refuse.
At least six fines ranging from $300 to $900 have been issued for
noncompliance.
An estimated 15,083 tons in 1990, excluding cardboard and scrap metal
(and 39,000 gallons of motor oil, which were burned)
Page 122
-------
Portland, Oregon
Multi-unit Collection
The City of Portland runs a multi-unit recycling program through Portland State University (PSU).
The City provides technical assistance and supplies containers, such as 90-gallon roll carts, which PSU
delivers to multi-unit buildings (including several high-rises). PSU is paid by the City for its services.
As of June 1991,330 buildings had been supplied with recycling systems. While buildings do not have to
pay for containers, they pay for the pkk-up of recyclables by private haulers through their
refuse/recycling bills. Buildings have established different systems compatible with haulers'
collection programs. Materials are collected and marketed by the hauler of the building's choice.
Many buildings have set up recycling depots in parking lots. Materials are segregated by type; glass is
sorted by color. In some buildings, residents are supplied with individual recycling bins and instructed
to bring materials to the curbside. The City has budgeted $162,000 for fiscal year 1992 to set up
recycling systems at 170 sites (buildings), which is equivalent to 6,000 apartment units.
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling
Legislative
Requirements:
Service Provider:
Number Served:
Type Served:
Materials Collected:
Pick-up Frequency:
Set-out and Collection
Method:
Incentives:
Enforcement:
Annual Tonnage
The Oregon Recycling Opportunity Act requires that waste haulers offer
collection of scrap metal, tin cans, glass, newspaper, corrugated
cardboard, and high-grade office paper to commercial establishments in
Portland. The participation of businesses and institutions in this program
is voluntary.
All City-permitted waste haulers. Independent recyclers such as
Weyerhauser, Far West Fibers, and K.B. Recycling will also pick up
recyclable materials such as corrugated cardboard from large quantity
commercial generators.
Not available
All businesses and institutions, including offices, retail establishments,
grocery stores, restaurants, printing shops, municipal offices, and schools
Materials for which haulers are required to offer pick-up are high-grade
paper, newspaper, corrugated cardboard, glass containers, tin cans, and
scrap metal. Some haulers also collect mixed paper and PET and HDPE
plastic.
Varies
Recyclables are segregated by material type and set out in separate
containers. A variety of vehicles is utilized for the collection of
materials.
Some haulers pay their customers for material. The cost of recycling and
refuse service may not exceed refuse service alone, according to State law.
Some large businesses such as Fred Meyer and Tektronix have saved
money through recycling by reducing their refuse collection fees, which
are generally based on per container and per pick-up fees.
While haulers are required by law to offer recyclable collection service to
their customers, many do not inform their customers of this option, and
there is currently little enforcement of the law.
Not available
Page 123
-------
Portland, Oregon
1990 the Metropolitan Service District (Metro) stepped up its efforts to develop commercial
recycling-programs. It conducted a promotional campaign for office paper recycling, "Paper Train Your
Staff," and distributed starter kits to Portland area businesses. The kits include handbooks and labeled
desk-top recycling boxes. Metro also refers companies to haulers that pick up office paper, and provides
a commercial waste audit program. Metro reports that recycling of printing, writing, and other paper,
including magazines, has increased from 23 percent in 1989 to 49 percent in 1990. Metro believes that
some of this increase may be due to the "Paper Train Your Staff" Program.
Most major businesses collect corrugated cardboard for recycling. Fred Meyer, Inc., a major retailer
in the City, has implemented a recycling program that recovers all office paper as well as a shelf
labeling program that identifies products made from recycled materials. Some large businesses send
select loads of commercial waste to Waste Tech, located in the Metro region, where cardboard, plastic,
and office paper are separated out and processed.
Drop-off Centers
Number and Type 147 (including 30 scrap dealers) in a three-county area
Public or Private: Private, except for the recycling/yard waste depots at the two transfer
stations, which are owned by Metro. The operation of these facilities is
contracted out to the private sector.
Sectors Served: Residential and commercial/institutional
Materials Accepted: Newspaper, high-grade paper, corrugated cardboard, magazines, other
waste paper, glass, aluminum, tin cans, scrap metal, motor oil, HOPE, PP,
and PS plastics, wine bottles and canning jars (for reuse)
Annual Tonnage Not available. (90 percent of all recyclable and compostable materials
collected from the residential sector in Portland are recovered through
drop-off sites.) In 1989,2,420 tons of material were collected through four
drop-off sites operated by the Portland Recycling Team.
Drop-off sites established in the early 1970's provided Portland residents their first recycling
opportunities. Three different organizations—Portland Recycling Team, Sunflower Recycling
Cooperative, and Cloudburst—set up the first drop-off sites in 1970-71, with Portland Recycling Team
implementing the first of these. Currently, both City transfer stations serve as drop-off sites for
recyclables. At one transfer, residents drive up to refuse pits, unload their refuse, and place recyclable
materials into shopping carts or bins. Metro-contracted employees wheel recyclables to a storage area.
In the second transfer station, residents tip refuse onto the ground and employees remove quantities of
recyclable materials. For example, large volumes of paper are removed from commercial refuse and
sorted on a paper line located on the premises. Household hazardous materials are also removed.
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables
Recyclable materials collected at curbside are either marketed by haulers with minimal processing
or taken to one of two privately owned processing facilities in the Portland area. According to a Solid
Waste Planner at Metro, approximately 50 percent of all materials collected from the residential
curbside program and 25 percent of those collected from businesses are brought to the K.B. Recycling or
Waste Tech facilities (also known as the Oregon Processing Recovery Center). The majority of these
materials are brought to K.8. (In 1991 all materials collected at curbside by Portland Recycling Refuse
Page 124
-------
Portland, Oregon
Operators [PRROS, a large consortium of recyclers in Portland], were brought to K.B.) Most materials
taken to these processing facilities are already segregated by material type; the facilities will accept
limited loads of partially commingled material, such as newspaper mixed with corrugated cardboard,
or tin mixed with aluminum.
K.B. Recycling runs two different facilities, one in Canby and one in Milwaukee. Portland's haulers
bring materials to the facility in Milwaukee, 4 miles from the city limits of Portland. K.B. pays for all
materials it accepts, excluding mixed paper. While most recyclable material is delivered to the
facility by private haulers, residents and businesses also drop off materials, and K.B. will pick up
material from large volume generators, such as businesses and schools. The 18,000-square-foot facility,
which opened in 1987, employs 20 people and operates 6 days a week, processing 167 tons per day of
newspaper, corrugated cardboard, high-grade paper, mixed paper (including telephone books), glass,
tin and aluminum cans, HOPE and PET plastic jugs, and aluminum, copper, and brass scrap metal. The
total capital cost of the facility was approximately $1.5 million, including start-up costs and
additional site improvements and machinery purchases made through 1991. (By 1990 more than $1
million had been spent) K.B. Recycling uses Krause machinery manufactured in Bellingham, WA. Six
conveyors, one conveyor/baler, four forklifts, and two scales are used to process materials. Eight to ten
employees sort paper products, including newspaper, junk mail, corrugated cardboard, and high-grade
paper, on three conveyor belts. Tin cans are separated from aluminum cans on another conveyor
equipped with a magnetic head outside of the building. Plastic jugs are separated from ferrous cans on a
fifth conveyor belt. Workers empty sorted glass from the recycling trucks with a rotating forklift into
separate 20- or 30-cubic-yard boxes. Using a HRB-10 Harris Baler /conveyor (which cost $450,000 in
1988), operators separately bale newspaper, corrugated cardboard, high-grade paper, tin and
aluminum cans, and HOPE and PET plastics. An estimated 2 percent by weight of recyclables brought to
the processing center are rejected and landfilled.
Some haulers market their own materials with minimal processing; one such example is Sunflower
Recycling Cooperative. Sunflower collected an estimated 3,133 tons of recyclable (including the eight
mandatory materials, mixed paper, HOPE plastic jugs, and PP and PS plastic tubs) through its
residential curbside program, commercial high-grade paper collection, and drop-off center in 1990. The
company processes the materials it collects at its own facility before delivering them to market. Class
cullet is hauled to Owens-Brockway, plastic is marketed at Partak in Vancouver, Washington and
Envirothene in Los Angeles, California, and paper products are marketed at Smurfit Recycling,
Weyerhauser, and EZ Recycling. Sunflower sold a small amount of refillable wine bottles, which it
collected through it curbside and drop-off programs, to a bottle washer in the Metro region. This,
however, was discontinued in 1991.
There are numerous brokers of recyclable materials in the metropolitan area, as well as many end
use markets. End use markets include two Smurfit deinking plants near Portland, which accept
newspaper and magazines; a Weyerhauser mill in Longview, Washington, which accepts deihked
newspaper for the manufacture of new newspaper; an Owens-Illinois glass plant, which accepts
container glass; three Oregon mills (Willamette Industries, Weyerhauser, and Georgia Pacific), which
process Portland's corrugated cardboard; and a detinning facility in Seattle, which accepts tin cans. In
addition, local brokers purchase plastic and nonferrous metal, and export large quantities of waste
paper to Asian mills through the Port of Portland.
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement
Portland's procurement policy directs the City to purchase recycled motor oil, compost, bark dust,
and retreaded tires wherever appropriate and available. The City also has a 5 percent price
preference for the purchase of recycled paper products.
The State of Oregon allows a 50 percent tax credit for investment in equipment or machinery used to
collect, transport, or process reclaimed plastic, or to manufacture a reclaimed plastic product. It also
Page 125
-------
Portland, Oregon
allows a 50 percent investment tax credit for facilities constructed to prevent, control, or reduce
pollution—including recycling facilities. Companies that process materials collected from Portland,
such as Georgia-Pacific, Owens-Illinois, Smurfit Newsprint, and Willamette Industries, have
benefitted from this tax credit
Composting Activities
Portland relies primarily on drop-off programs for the collection of yard waste and other organic
materials. Curbside collection service is currently limited to three private haulers that collectively
picked up 3,700 cubic yards, or an estimated 411 tons, of yard waste in 1990,1—about 3 percent of such
materials recovered in the City. Of the estimated 673,100 cubic yards (approximately 74,789 tons) of
loose yard waste generated per year in the City, an estimated 16 percent was recovered in 1990 through
all programs.
The City Office of Transportation Maintenance Division collects residential leaves at curbside in
the fall in neighborhoods with mature trees to prevent the dogging of storm drains. An estimated 2,777
tons of leaves, equivalent to 23 percent of recovered yard waste, are recovered through this collection
program. Approximately 20 percent of this amount is delivered directly to homeowners who have
requested leaves for use as a soil amendment. The remaining leaves are taken to a pilot composting site
in Portland.
Residents can bring leaves, brush, grass clippings, and wood waste to the transfer stations, where
they will be stored and eventually transported to one of two composting plants in the Portland
metropolitan region: Grimms Fuel or MacFarlane's Bark. Material can also be brought directly to these
two facilities. There are approximately five other composting or shredding facilities in the Metro
region and many more mobile chippers.
Backyard Composting
The Metropolitan Service District (Metro) promotes home composting through its Recycling
Information Center. It has established backyard composting demonstration sites in the region and
offers literature on how to compost at home. At these sites Metro offers backyard composting seminars
run by volunteers who have completed a master gardener course. Metro hopes to expand this program in
the future, and to provide 50 households in each county with backyard composting bins. It is not known
how many households in the City currently compost yard debris in their backyards.
Curbside Collection
Service Provider. Three private haulers—Sunflower Recycling, Inc., Cloudburst Recycling,
and Diane's Disposal—offered service to their refuse (and sometimes
other) customers.
Start-up Date: Sunflower began collecting food waste in 1973 and yard debris in 1987.
Diane's Disposal began picking up yard waste in 1989. Cloudburst began
collecting yard waste in the late 1980's.
Page 126
-------
Portland, Oregon
Households Served:
Materials Collected:
Set-out Method:
Collection Vehicles and
Method:
Collection Frequency:
Economic Incentives:
Annual Tonnages:
Sunflower serviced approximately 200 households with curbside
collection of yard waste (though not all of these households receive
monthly pick-up) and an estimated 105 households with collection of
food waste in 1990. Diane's Disposal reports that 20 percent of its refuse
customers set out yard waste each week. Its yard waste pick-up service
was discontinued in mid-1991.
No
Leaves, grass clippings, brush, and Christmas trees. Sunflower also
collected food waste at curbside (including bones, fat, and other food
scraps), but this service was discontinued in June 1991.
In 1990 Sunflower collected loose yard debris; food waste was set out in 5-
gallon buckets (old paint or soap buckets) provided to residents free of
charge, which were emptied into a side bin ("slop bucket") on the truck.
These bins could hold material from approximately 25 to 30 buckets.
Diane's Disposal collected bagged yard debris. Residents could set out up
to two bags of yard debris each week.
In 1990 Sunflower Recycling, Inc. picked up food waste in side bins on
compactor trucks which were simultaneously used to collect garbage. A
compactor truck was used for the collection of yard debris.
In 1990 Sunflower collected waste weekly, year-round, and yard waste
once a month between April and November, and on call during the
summer. Diane's Disposal picked up yard waste on a weekly basis year-
round, on the same day as refuse collection. Cloudburst collects material
on a monthly basis.
Diane's Disposal provided free collection of limited quantities of bagged
yard debris. Sunflower and Cloudburst charged for the service.
An estimated 411 tons of yard waste were collected at curbside in 1990.
Sunflower collected approximately 126 tons (1,137 cubic yards) of this
amount
In 1990 Sunflower Recycling, Inc., serviced 1,600 households with refuse collection, up from 1,100 in
1989. Of these, 105 households, or 7 percent, signed up for food waste collection, and approximately 200
households received yard waste pick-up. Sunflower estimates that it collected 5 tons of food waste per
month, which adds up to approximately 60 tons per year.
Due to changes in Portland's refuse and recycling collection system, Sunflower terminated its food
and yard waste collection program in June 1991. According to Sunflower, food waste collection and
composting would have been more cost-effective had the company collected a greater volume of
material. Customers were charged an additional $2 for this service, and only a small percentage of
customers signed up. The company will continue to operate its drop-off site, but will no longer accept
food waste.
Composting Sites
Sunflower Recycling mixes food scraps with sawdust (a ratio of 2:1) in two 7-cubic-yard cement
mixers. The food waste compost could be finished in 2 to 3 weeks; however, workers tend not to turn the
Page 127
-------
Portland, Oregon1- /-'
material frequently, so the composting process takes 2 months on average. The company sells
approximately 3 cubic yards (estimated at 21 /4 tons)2 per month, at $10 per cubic yard.
Sunflower delivers the yard waste it collects to Grimm's and McFarlane's composting sites. The
company recovered 1,137 cubic yards of yard waste in 1990 through its curbside service and drop-off
programs—twice the amount it recovered in 1989.
Grimm's accepts pallets, residential yard trimmings, and stumps and woody discards from land
development and construction projects. It began accepting construction debris in 1991. Tipping fees range
from $4 per cubic yard for residential yard trimmings to $6 JO per cubic yard for loose material ($17 to
$20 per compacted ton).
All incoming material is ground (or sheared to 3 inch by 3 inch pieces and then ground in the case of
cleared trees) prior to composting. Pallets and stumps are ground separately and hauled to the Smurfit
Newsprint plant in Newburg, Oregon, for use as hog fuel. Excluding pallets, Grimm's Fuel, the larger of
the metropolitan area facilities, processed an estimated 17,313 tons (155,815 cubic yards) collected from
the Metro area in 1990. The remaining material is composted in large piles on 2 to 3 acres of land and
turned three to four times with payloaders during the 6-month composting period. Equipment includes
grinders, conveyors, a trommel screen, a Clark 275 (15-cubic-yard) bucket loader, and several
payloaders. Much of this equipment is used sawmill equipment adapted by Grimm in-house. Grimm's
estimates that 0.5 percent of all material received is considered residue and noncompostable.
The compost end product, used by homeowners, landscapers, and nurseries, includes garden mulch
mixed with steam-sterilized horse manure.
McFarlane Bark, located in Milwaukee, just southeast of Portland, accepts organic yard trimmings
and residential wood waste (such as old 2 by 4's) self-hauled by residents, or brought in by landscapers
or by curbside haulers from outside of Portland. A nearby juice company hauls citrus peels to the site for
composting. McFarlane processed an estimated 11,089 tons (99,797 cubic yards) of Metro material.
Approximately 50 percent of the 500 to 600 cubic yards (estimated at 56 to 67 tons) delivered per day to
McFarlane is brought from the residential sector; the remainder is commercial and landscapers'
material.
McFarlane charges a tipping fee of $35 per ton, with a $2 minimum. Contaminants, which are
estimated to be 1 percent by weight of incoming material, are picked out and landfilled at a cost of $68
per ton. The remaining material is ground and added to "Mt. McFarlane," a compost pile more than 100
feet high, where it remains for at least 10 months with minimal turning. Recently, odor complaints to
the State Department of Environmental Quality have prompted more frequent turning. Composted
material is screened prior to sale in bulk as fine, medium, or coarse compost. McFarlane will begin
selling bagged compost in spring 1992.
Mixed Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Composting
Citizen rejection of incinerators and the difficulty of siting a new landfill in the Portland area
have prompted Metro to consider MSW composting as a viable solid waste management alternative. In
April 1991, Metro opened a 600-ton-per-day MSW composting facility on an 18-acre site in a light
industrial area well served by major transportation arteries. Riedel Environmental Technologies
operates the facility, using DANO MSW composting technology. The $24 million capital cost of the
plant was publicly financed by tax-exempt revenue bonds. The plant was designed to recover
recyclables and to produce a saleable compost using residential waste.
Metro's MSW composting plant was sized to accept about 50 percent of the Metro area's residential
waste. A "put or pay" provision obligates Metro to deliver (or pay for) a minimum of 185,000 tons per
year of MSW to the facility. The City of Portland will be delivering 80 percent, or 148,000 tons per
year, of this amount. A $68 per ton tipping fee, which is the same as the transfer station tipping fee, is
Page 128
-------
Portland, Oregon
charged at the facility. Of this money, Riedel receives $48, and Metro receives $20, which it uses to
fund public education programs, hazardous waste collection, and recycling grants.
Riedel is required to recycle at least 5 percent of the feedstock. Source-separation recycling
programs and Oregon's container deposit legislation will potentially minimize the quantity of
recyclables entering the waste stream. Composting takes 6 weeks to complete. Plans are to market the
finished compost to landscaping firms and as a soil amendment for sod and Christmas tree farms, but
only if tested compost consistently meets Metro and State Department of Environmental Quality
standards. Metro specifications require that no more than 60,000 tons of material (approximately one-
third of incoming tonnages) be landfilled as residue.
The start-up period has not been without problems, primarily related to odor control, household
hazardous materials handling, and meeting the 5 percent recovery and marketing requirement for
recyclables. Nearby residents and businesses in the industrial park filed a complaint about the odor
with Oregon's DEQ. Riedel has applied bark chips to the building's floor, has planted 300 trees, and
continues to work with DANO to fully address the odor problem. Few recyclables have actually been
recovered and many of those that have been recovered have been unmarketable. Riedel retrained
"pickers," in order to improve the removal of recyclables at the beginning of the process, and is
considering adding cleaning/processing equipment to improve the marketability of its recyclables.
These problems may be further mitigated by Metro's construction of a permanent household hazardous
waste drop-off facility and by switching from a monthly to a weekly schedule for Portland's curbside
recycling collection (anticipated February 1992).
Commercial composters of yard trimmings and of sewage sludge have expressed concerns that
production from the MSW composting plant will hurt the market shares of their compost products.
Some fear that Metro will "give away" its compost; others, that the marketing of substandard compost
will discourage users from switching "permanently" to compost, hence retarding the overall market
growth of compost as an alternative to other soil amendments. In response, Metro negotiated
limitations on the sales of Riedel's compost product, including annual reviews of Riedel's marketing
efforts and plans. Concerns remain, however, because several operational problems are still being
worked out and the finished compost has yet to be mass marketed.
Due to persistent odor problems, in January 1992 the MSW composting facility stopped accepting
garbage. The plant's operators are under State order to remedy the problem. Additionally, the plant
has failed to produce a certified compost. Tests of lead content in the end product have exceeded the
acceptable standard of 250 parts per million.
Page 129
-------
Portland, Oregon
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
Total
Material (Tone, 1990)
Newspaper 34,148
Corrugated Cardboard 45,668
High-grade Paper 21,173
Other Paper* 19,008
Glass 1,510
PET Plastic t
HOPE Plastic 518
Other Plastic* 1,237
Aluminum jt
Ferrous Cans 1,142
Other Metal 39,206
Deposit Containers§ 13,908
Reusables** 3,177
Subtotal MSW Recycled 180,695
Food Waste 60
WoodWastett 6,729
Yard Waste** 12,265
Subtotal MSW Composted 19,054
Total MSW Recovered 199,749
Total C&D Recovered§§ NA
Notes: Data on the tonnage of materials (except food waste) recovered were estimates derived by the City on a per capita basis
from the total amount of materials recovered in the Portland metropolitan area. Tonnages recovered represent marketed material,
and cannot be broken down by sector.
In 1990,148 tons of oil and an unknown number of tires were recovered. Because these were burned as fuel, they are not inducted
in recycled tonnages. Whole tires are banned from landfilling in the State of Oregon.
* Includes magazines and mixed paper.
t Recovered PET plastic and aluminum are listed under Deposit Containers.
t Consists of PS. LDPE, and other plastic.
§ Includes 11,000 tons of glass, 626 tons of PET plastic, and 2,282 tons of aluminum cans.
-Includes thrift store items.
ttConsists primarily of wooden pallets.
** Includes leaves, brush, and Christmas trees.
§§ While tonnages of C&D recovered are not tracked and thus not available, the City recycling office believes that only a small
amount was recovered in 1990.
Page 130
-------
Portland, Oregon
Publicity and Education
Residential
The Gty of Portland coordinates a variety of publicity and education activities, including media
advertising, distribution of written materials, promotional events, and presentations at citizen
meetings. Refuse collectors are required to distribute Gty-printed recycling information at least twice
yearly to their customers. Many haulers provide their customers with additional educational
materials. Metro has also set up a Recycling Information Center through which citizens can receive
recycling information on the telephone. This service utilizes comprehensive computer data bases on
recycling services and markets. Funding for the center now comes from landfill tipping fees. In 1990 the
City developed a public display to publicize "environmental shopping" concepts and emphasize the
benefits of recycling.
Commercial/Institutional
In February 1990, the Metropolitan Service District launched a "Paper Train Your Staff campaign,
giving starter kits for office paper recycling to more than 2,000 area firms, and referring companies to
private haulers that pick up office paper for recycling. The program received endorsements from top
management of 12 Portland area businesses, and was advertised on billboards and in displays at trade
shows. Metro also encourages landscapers to drop off yard waste at area processing sites for composting.
Economics
Costs Coven
The City did not incur capital costs for the collection or processing of
180,695 tons of recyclable material and 19,054 tons of compostable
materials in 1990; such activities are conducted by the private sector and
paid for by customers in refuse bills. The City incurs some costs for the
administration of recycling and composting programs and for education
and publicity programs. Additional administrative costs are incurred by
Metro, and are not included in this report. While most capital costs are
unavailable, equipment, capital expenditures, and operating costs
incurred by one model recycling hauler (which are not necessarily
representative of other haulers) are described below.
Page 131
-------
Portland, Oregon
City's Annual«and Per Ton Operating and Maintenance Costs (1990)*
Cost
Tons Covered Per Ton Cost
Recycling & Composting Total
Collection
Processing
Administration
Education/Publicity
Vl
$675,298
$0
0
612,250
63,048
Mores: The above costs reflect only the cost Incurred by he City of Portland for administration, education, and promotion of
recycling and composting programs. Metro incurs additional administrative and education/publicity costs for Portend* programs.
Metro also covers the cost of operating two recycling drop-off centers at the transfer stations. All other recycling costs are
incurred by private haulers and residents through refuse bills.
In FY 1991 the City's total budget for recycling and composting programs will increase to $2.4 million. Of this, $450,000 wll be
spent for the purchase of residential recycling containers. Metro will pay an additional $450,000 for the purchase of containers.
The costs listed above are for FY 1990 (July 1990 to June 1991).
Sunflower Recycling Cooperative's Capital Costs
Item
International Step Van (1971)
Retrofitted
Cost
$12,000
use
Recycling Collection
Year Incurred
1982
Dodge Truck (1972) 5,000
2 Compactor @ 5% of use 14,000
2 Caterpillar ForkBfts (1976,78) 16,500
Economy Baler (for paper) 10,000
Cement Mixer (used) 300
Retrofitting 1,000
Granulator (for plastics) 17,000
40 1 -cubic-yard to 43-cubic- 10,000
yard containers
Office paper
Collection
Yard Waste Collection
Processing
Processing
Food Waste
Processing
Processing
All uses
1987
1990
1987. 1989
1988
NA
1990
NA
Note: Of the equipment listed above, the Dodge truck, forklifts, and baler have not yet been paid off.
In 1990 Sunflower Recycling Cooperative's total gross income from its refuse, recycling, and
composting business was $550,000, $240,000 excluding refuse collection. Its total costs in 1990 for 3319
tons of recyclable and compostable material collected were approximately $230,000, equivalent to $69
per ton. Sunflower employed 25 people in 1990 for recycling and yard waste collection and processing
activities.
Page 132
-------
Portland, Oregon
Materials Revenues: The Qty does not receive revenue from the sale of recydables or compost.
Source of Funding: Funding for the City's administration of recycling programs currently
comes from a $2.85 per ton surcharge ($0.50 of which is spent on
remediation of a hazardous waste site) in FY 1990, billed to refuse
collectors for solid waste collection within the City service area.
Full-time Employees: 3 City employees in 1990
Part-time Employees: A few Qty employees assist in promotion efforts and financial planning.
Future Solid Waste Management Plans
The Gty is restructuring its recycling collection program in order to increase participation and
recovery rates. Collection of refuse and recyclables will be more tightly controlled by the City. The
new system will standardize garbage and recycling collection procedures, and will not allow individual
operators to collect recydables unless they service a minimum of 3,000 customers. The City will require
use of a compartmentalized recycling truck with hydraulic dumping bins. Haulers wishing to use other
trucks must prove their vehicles can work as efficiently and can make a minimum of 240 stops per
vehicle per day (a standard determined by the City). Beginning in the spring of 1992, all haulers will
be required by the City to collect yard waste. The Qty has proposed monthly collection beginning in
April 1992 and bi-weekly collection beginning in July of that year. Yard debris will be set out in 30-
gallon paper bags, 32-gallon cans, or 60-or-90-gallon roll-off carts (formerly used for refuse disposal);
plastic bags will not be allowed. The cost of collecting 1 unit of yard waste (i.e., one 30-gallon
container) per collection period will be covered by residents refuse/recycling fees. Residents setting out
additional yard debris will be charged an additional fee, which will be less than the per can refuse
fee. The total cost of the new recycling and composting program, induding residential and commercial
activities, will be $2.4 million in FY 1991.
A private company in Portland, Wood Exchange, has recently begun to chip wood waste, induding
pallets, for the manufacture of particle board. In the future, it will recover larger pieces of wooden
construction debris for the manufacture of particle board and will repair pallets for reuse. Other
recycling entrepreneurs that offer recovery of what they term "difficult wastes," such as construction
debris, have recently emerged.
Contacts
Terry Peterson Stan Kahn
Senior Solid Waste Planner Sunflower Recycling Cooperative
Metropolitan Service District PO Box 42466
2000 SW First Avenue Portland, OR 97242
Portland, OR 97201-5398 Phone (503) 238-1640
Phone (503) 221-1646
Portland, OR 97242
Page 133
-------
Portland, Oregon
Bruce Walker
Recycling Program Manager
Portland Bureau of Environmental Services
1120 SW 5th Avenue, Room 400
Phone (503) 796-7772
Fax (503) 796-6995
Ussa West
Recycling Project Coordinator
Portland Bureau of Environmental Services
1120 SW 5th Avenue
Portland, OR 97204-1972
Phone (503) 796-7735
References ^
Allan, Theresa, et al. Beyond 25 Percent: Materials Recovery Comes of Age. Washington D.C.: Institute
for Local Self-Reliance, 1989.
"Portland, Oregon, Paper Training." Biocycle, February 1990, p. 24.
Powell, Jerry. "The Nation's Oldest and Largest Recycling Market Development." Biocycle, March
1990,48-49.
Hamburg, Ken. "Portland Takes Lead in Compost Technology." The Oregonian, March 29,1991, E-3M.
Gurkewitz, Sandy. "Yard Debris Compost Testing." Biocycle, June 1989,58-60.
Regional Yard Debris Recycling Plan. Portland Metropolitan Area/Metro Region, January 1991.
3990 Recycling Levels: Survey of Recycling Markets. Portland: Solid Waste Department, Metropolitan
Service District, July 1991.
Endnotes
1 Based on Portland's conversion factor of 9 cubic yards per ton of mixed yard waste.
2Denaty of completed compost is 1,500 Ibs/cubk yard. (Source: Sunflower Recycling Cooperative, 1991)
Page 134
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
24C
Providence,
Rhode Island
Demographics
Jurisdiction: City of Providence
Population:
Area:
Total Households:
Total Businesses and
Institutions:
Brief Description:
160,728 in 1990
19 square miles
61,454 (13,456 single-family residences and 47,998 households in multi-
family buildings)
1,065 (1,023 businesses and institutions, 42 schools)
Providence, the capital of Rhode Island and the third largest city in New
England, is located on the eastern seaboard. Its primary industries are
health care and jewelry manufacturing. Providence is also home to
Brown University and the Rhode Island School of Design. The City
estimates its unemployment rate at 8 percent in 1990,35 percent above the
national average of 5.5 percent
Page 135
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
Annual Tonnages (1990)
Commercial/ Total
Residential* Institutional MSW
Recovered 8,191 8,700* 16,900
Recycled 8,191 nr NA NA
Composted 0 NA NA
Disposed 72,486 58,300 130,800
Incinerated 0 00
Landfilled ,... 72,486 58,300 130,800
Generated 80,677 67,000§ 147,700
Percent by Weight Recovered
Recovered 10% 13% 11%
Recycled 10% NA NA
Composted 0% NA NA
Note: Tonnages of construction and disposal waste disposed and recovered in Providence are not tracked on a city level and thus
not listed in this chart
'Residential waste recycled and disposed includes only materials collected from one- to six-unit buildings and public housing. It
does not include refuse or recydabtes collected from households in buildings with more than six units. In 1990 an estimated one-
half of such households was recycling, but materials were collected by private haulers and tonnages were not tracked. If tonnages
broken during processing (14% of collected recydabtes) are included in waste disposed rather than waste recovered, Providence's
residential recovery rate would drop to 9%.
t Providence does not track the tonnage of commercial and institutional waste generated in the City. Tonnages of commercial and
institutional waste disposed and recovered, given above, are estimates by ILSR staff based on data submitted to the Rl
Department of Environmental Management by 34 of Providence's 56 businesses with more than 250 employees. Businesses of this
size were required to submit reports in 1990 detailing waste recovered and dsposed.
$For an explanation of how we calculated commercial and institutional waste recovered, please see Amount and Breakdown of
Materials Recovered
§We estimated the commercial and institutional waste generated in Providence by multiplying by three the post-consumer tonnage
generated from the 34 establishments (22,245 tons) that submitted recycling reports (by March 1991). These businesses have
32,000 employees, about one-third of all the employees in Providence. Further, researchers at Brown University who have been
eva|uating the date submitted from businesses across the State, have generally found that the waste generated from those
businesses completing recycling reporting requirements on a state level by March 1991, represented one-third of all commercial
waste generated in Rhode Island. (Personal communication, John McCabe, Brown University, April and July 1991.)
Landfill Tipping Fee: $13.00 per ton in 1989, $13.98 in 1990. Tipping fee for private haulers
disposing commercial material was $49 per ton in 1990.
Refuse Collection and The City of Providence contracts with Chambers Waste Systems to collect
Disposab refuse from the residential sector, including buildings with up to six units,
as well as public housing buildings. Municipally collected refuse is
disposed of at the State-owned Central Landfill in Johnston, RI,
approximately 15 miles from the city, where 90 percent of the State's
refuse is disposed. In 1990 the City paid its refuse hauler $2,773,432 for
the collection and disposal of 72,486 tons of refuse disposed, including
tipping fees but excluding administrative overhead. This is equivalent to
$38 per ton.
Page 136
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
Municipal Solid Waste Recovered and Disposed (Percent by Weight 1990)
Disposed 89% I,,, Recovered 11%
Residential Disposed - ^__^^__^^__^^^___^__
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^HI^^^^^BKil ^*08&
. Residential Recycled 6%
*«&»Comm/lnst Recovered 6%
Comm/lnst Disposed 39%
Note: Due to rounding, numbers do not add to percent disposed and percent recovered.
Refuse Collection and Refuse from households in multi-unit buildings and commercial and
Disposal (cont'd): institutional establishments is collected by at least ten private haulers,
and much of it is hauled to the state Central landfill for disposal. In 1990
an estimated 40 percent of privately hauled waste from Providence was
disposed of out of state, in Massachusetts. However, in June 1991, the
State launched an effort to enforce its 1986 flow control legislation, which
mandates that all solid waste generated in the state be disposed in State
facilities. (The State Solid Waste Management Corporation is supported
by tipping fees and loses money if material is disposed out of state.)
Private haulers collect construction and demolition (C&D) debris; they
bring most of the wood waste, concrete, and asphalt collected to New
England Ecological Development (NEED), located near the Johnston
landfill, for processing. Wood is chipped and eventually burned as a fuel;
concrete and asphalt are processed and sold as fill. However, tonnages of
C&D waste disposed and recycled are not tracked.
Between October 1989 and December 1991, the Rhode Island Solid Waste
Management Corporation, which is responsible for building and operating
State solid waste facilities, purchased 82 houses and 100 parcels of land
adjacent to the State landfill because the landfill was perceived as an
odor problem.
According to the 1986 Solid Waste Management Law, the State is
required to build three 750-ton-per-day mass burn waste incinerators
and three recycling facilities.
Page 137
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
Refuse Collection and While the three incinerators have already been sited (the Central Fall
Disposal (conf dh site is only proposed), and two of the three are in the permitting stages,
construction of the incinerators has not yet begun. The proposed
incinerators have met with local opposition, and the incinerator sited for
North Kingston has not been able to prove it can meet emissions
standards. In June 1991, a bill, which failed by a narrow margin, was
introduced in the State Senate to eliminate construction of two of the
three incinerators.
Materials Recovery Overview
Goals and Legislative Rhode Island was the first state in the nation to mandate recycling. Its
Requirements: 1986 Solid Waste Management Law requires municipal solid waste to be
source-separated into recyclable and nonrecyclable components prior to
disposal in State facilities. The law established a State goal of recycling
15 percent of the total waste generated from the residential and
commercial sectors and from municipal government offices. The Law also
required the construction of three State recycling facilities and three
State incinerators. The State is required to fund all reasonable costs for
municipal recycling activities during the first 3 years of a program's
operation. Beginning in 1990, State disposal facilities could no longer
accept commercial waste containing more than 20 percent by weight of
listed recyclables. In April 1989 Providence passed a local recycling
ordinance mandating citizen participation in its source-separation
program.
With a population of only 1 million, the state of Rhode Island manages its solid waste and
materials recovery in a centralized fashion. State agencies, the Department of Environmental
Management (DEM) and the Solid Waste Management Corporation (SWMC), oversee planning,
program development, construction and operation of facilities for disposal and materials processing,
publicity, and education. They also provide financial and technical assistance to municipalities for
implementation of recycling programs. Municipalities are responsible for collection of refuse and
recyclables, and for enforcement of the source-separation requirement
Statewide recycling was mandated in Rhode Island in 1986, and in 1987 pilot curbside recycling
programs began in the communities of East Greenwich and West Warwick. In 1988 municipal recycling
programs in the State were expanded to include a total of 130,000 households. A State-owned,
privately operated materials processing center, designed to process 120 tons per day of recyclables, was
opened in April 1989. In 1990 the processing center (known in the State as a materials recovery facility,
or MRF) was operating above capacity, processing an average of 190 tons per day of recyclables. The
second State processing center, while already sited, has been forestalled by financial difficulties and
by the linking of its construction with the construction of an incinerator. Despite Rhode Island's initial
intention to include all municipalities in the recycling program, only 20 of the State's 39 cities and
towns had instituted mandatory recycling programs by June 1991.
The City of Providence began curbside collection of recyclables in October 1989. The cost of recycling
is shared between the City and the State. The City pays the annual contract for collection of recyclable
materials, and the State supplied the recycling bins and provides publicity and educational materials.
Providence is reimbursed by the State for all reasonable costs associated with the recycling program for
the first 3 years of the program's operation, including the collection contract. In the initial phase of
the program, households served with municipal refuse collection (households in buildings with less
Page 138
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
than seven units or in public housing), municipal offices, and businesses were required to recycle. In the
second phase of the program, all households were required to recycle. Households in multi-unit
buildings and commercial businesses rely on private, independent haulers for this service. By 1991 all
of the Qty's public schools were recycling.
Recycling Activities
Residential Curb side Recycling
Start-up Date:
Service Provider:
Pick-up Frequency:
Same Day as Refuse:
Households Served:
Mandatory:
Participation Rate:
Materials Collected:
Set-out Method:
Collection Method and
Vehicles:
Enforcement:
Economic Incentives:
Annual Tonnage
October 30,1989
Chambers Waste Systems, under contract with the City. McCaughey,
another private hauler under contract with the City, collects materials
from public housing.
Weekly
Yes
56,423 households in 1990, including residences in buildings up to and
including six units, and five public housing buildings.
Yes
74 percent (based on the number of bins set out per month divided by the
total number of households served). In the beginning of the program,
participation in source-separation programs in South Providence and the
West End, which are primarily multi-lingual minority, neighborhoods,
was quite low with an average participation rate of 30 percent. To raise
participation, the City targeted special education programs to these
neighborhoods, including distribution of foreign language brochures
published by the State. According to Providence's Recycling Coordinator,
by late 1990, participation in these neighborhoods averaged 60 percent.
Newspaper, glass, aluminum and ferrous food and beverage containers,
milk (HOPE) jugs and soda (PET) bottles
Plastic, glass, and metal containers are commingled in a 14-gallon blue
recycling bin supplied by the State. Newspaper is bundled or placed in
kraft paper bags on top of other recyclables.
The City is divided into nine different collection routes for recycling pick-
up. Labrie side-loading, dual-compartmented collection trucks are
utilized for curbside collection. Trucks are operated by a single crew
member, who places newspaper into one bin and commingled recyclables
into the other. The bins are then hydraulically lifted and emptied into
the appropriate compartment.
Upon random inspection, the City will issue residents who put refuse in
their recycling bin a warning and subsequently a fine for $25. By October
1991, a few tickets had been issued. Ticket fees are returned to the City's
general fund. Additionally, scavengers can be fined $250 for taking
materials from recycling bins.
None
8,171 tons in 1990
Page 139
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
Multi-unit Collection
According to State law (passed July 1988), all multi-unit buildings (not serviced with municipal
collection) must begin recycling the same materials as those in the curbside recycling program within 6
months of the onset of the municipal recycling program. Multi-unit buildings must contract with
private haulers for this service. According to the Gty's recycling coordinators, an estimated one-half
of Providence's 13,000 households in buildings with seven or more units was in compliance with
recycling regulations 1990.
Apartment buildings are serviced by at least 10 different private haulers, who are responsible for
securing their own recycling markets. Residents of buildings in compliance with DEM planning
requirements are supplied with 5-gallon recycling buckets. Many private haulers supply 96-gallon
wheeled toters and require residents to bring materials downstairs to centrally located storage
containers, which are often kept outside, adjacent to dumpsters. Newspaper is placed in one toter and
commingled materials in the other. Private haulers charge separately for the collection of recyclable
materials, on a per pick-up, per volume basis. The cost of picking up recydables varies from hauler to
hauler and can exceed the cost of picking up refuse in a few cases. However in some cases, if an
apartment building can reduce its size or number of refuse containers or frequency of refuse pick-up,
overall refuse budgets can decrease.
Managers of multi-unit buildings (not serviced with municipal curbside collection) are also required
to submit plans to the DEM for reducing and recycling their building's solid waste. Recycling plans must
provide information on how materials will be collected and marketed, resident education/publicity
programs, and how the program will be evaluated. Recycling plans from multi-unit buildings were
required to be filed at the State DEM by October 1990. Multi-unit recycling has been put on hold because
the MRF has been operating over its capacity.
Five public housing high-rise buildings are serviced with recyclable materials collection through
the Gty's program. The buildings contain 200 to 300 units each for a total of 997 units. McCaughey, a
private hauler that services these building with refuse pick-up, provides weekly collection of glass,
cans, plastic containers, and newspaper. Materials are brought to the State MRF for processing.
Apartment tenants are supplied with 5-gallon recycling buckets; they bring their newspapers and
commingled bottles and cans to two 96-gallon toters located indoors in a central storage area. Building
staff estimate high participation rates, between 80 and 90 percent, and little contamination of
recyclable materials. In a 3-month period, from April to June 1991, 200 tons of refuse and 41 tons of
commingled recyclables were collected from these five buildings, yielding a recycling rate of 17 percent.
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling
Legislative Since January 1, 1989, commercial businesses in Providence have been
Requirements: required, according to State regulations, to recycle a specific list of
materials (see below). All municipal offices have been required to recycle
since the fall of 1989. Additionally, businesses with more than 50
employees must submit recycling and waste reduction plans and annual
recycling reports to the State DEM according to a specific timetable.
Businesses with more than 500 employees were required to submit plans by
June 30, 1989; businesses with between 250 and 499 employees were
required to submit plans by December 31,1989; businesses with 101 to 249
employees were required to submit their plans by June 30, 1990; and
businesses with 51 to 100 employees are required to submit plans by
December 31, 1991. Within 60 days after the plan is approved by the
DEM, the recycling program must be fully implemented. Compliance
inspection by the DEM may take place any time after this 60-day period.
Page 140
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
Legislative Requirements Once their plans have been approved by the DEM, businesses must file an
(cont'd): annual report on their recycling and waste reduction programs.
Service Provider:
Number Served:
Type Served:
Materials Collected:
Pick-up Frequency:
Set-out and Collection
Method:
Incentives/Enforcement:
Annual Tonnage:
An estimated 10 private haulers collect recyclable materials from the
commercial/institutional sector in Providence. These include BFI and
local companies such as McCaughey and Macera Brothers. The public
schools contract with Chambers Waste to collect recyclable materials.
Municipal offices contract with McCaughey to collect their recydables.
It is not known exactly how many businesses were recycling in 1990;
however, 33 of the 34 commercial businesses submitting reports or plans to
the DEM were recycling at least a few materials. A majority of the
remaining 22 businesses with over 250 employees are also recycling, as are
many of the businesses with more than 50 employees. In addition, 15
public and 15 private schools were recycling in 1990.
As of 1991, all businesses with over 100 employees have approved plans
filed at the DEM and were recycling mandatory materials. In 1991 all 33
public schools were recycling. All municipal offices have been recycling
since 1989.
All businesses were required to recycle in 1990. Institutional recycling is
also considered mandatory, although this is not stated in the law.
hi 1990 businesses were required to recycle corrugated cardboard, white
office paper, colored office paper, glass food and beverage containers, tin
and steel containers, aluminum cans, newspaper, HOPE milk containers,
and PET soft drink containers. Some businesses voluntarily recycled other
plastics, textiles, white goods, metals, waste oil, and batteries. At least
two businesses and one university were recovering food waste.
In 1991 businesses were also required to recycle white goods, wood waste,
used oil, lead-acid batteries, and automobiles.
Varies
Businesses set out materials in a variety of containers including
compactors, 8- or 6-cubic-yard containers, or 96-gallon toters. Sometimes
materials are stored outside and sometimes they are stored inside. Some
private haulers utilize dual compartmentalized collection vehicles.
Potential savings to businesses that reduce the number or size of refuse
containers. According to the DEM, by 1991 all businesses with over 500
employees have been inspected and fines have been issued for failure to
comply with planning requirements.
Exact tonnages are not available.
Generators of commercial waste must prepare a waste reduction and recycling plan for their business
(see above). The plan must list the amount and types of materials currently recycled, the amount of
refuse disposed, a waste stream composition breakdown, and a proposed plan for reducing and/or
recycling the required components of the waste stream—including how materials will be separated,
collected, and transported to market. The plan must also describe how the program will be publicized
to employees, and must give a detailed description of materials comprising at least 5 percent of the
waste stream that are not targeted to be reduced by at least 70 percent. While DEM enforced the
planning requirement in 1990, it did not, however, enforce the implementation. In 1991 it hired a full-
time staff person to visit businesses and enforce the implementation of the recycling programs.
Page 141
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
Brown University recovered 19 percent of its waste stream (or 413 tons of material) through
recycling and composting over a 12-month period, from July 1989 to June 1990. Sixty-one percent of the
recovered material consisted of food scraps, which are collected daily by a Massachusetts hog farmer.
Brown has recovered food waste for 15 years. In 1989-90, it recovered 252 tons of food scraps through its
largest dining hall, which generates an estimated three-fourths of the food waste generated on campus.
Leftover food and food preparation waste, including meat scraps, are scrapped into barrels by kitchen
staff. The hog farmer picks up the food waste (estimated at 1,500 Ibs per day) every morning, 7 days
per week. The University also collects office paper, corrugated cardboard, newspaper, scrap metal, and
yard waste for recovery. Yard waste is composted at a local farm.1
At least two other businesses in Providence—a potato wholesaler and a bakery—recover food
waste. The owner of a local hog farm, Vinagro Farms (located near the Johnston landfill), picks up food
scraps daily from these two enterprises. (The potato wholesaler is serviced 5 days per week; Calise
Bakery receives pick-up 6 days per week.) A total of 1,450 tons of food scraps were collected from these
two businesses in 1990.2
Beginning mid-1990, local public and private schools have recycled a variety of materials. By 1991
32 public schools and 10 private schools were recycling. The City negotiated with Chambers Waste
Systems, the school's refuse hauler, to pick up recydables free of charge. Commingled recyclables, tin
and aluminum cans, and PET and HOPE plastic containers are brought to the MRF for processing.
Corrugated cardboard and high-grade paper are brought to a local broker. In 1990,100 tons of material
were collected from public schools alone.
According to a research project conducted at Brown University, two-thirds of Rhode Island's larger
businesses that have completed mandatory recycling reports have either saved money or maintained
their previous costs as a result of recycling; businesses reported net savings up to $108,000 per year.
(Actual savings are believed to be even higher as one-time implementation and capital costs were
incurred during the first year of the program's operation.)
Drop-off Centers
The Providence Department of Public Works collects waste oil at one drop-off site. The site is
operated by the Department of Public Works, and is open 6 days per week, and staffed from 7 to 5, and
unstaffed from 5 to 11. Private haulers drop off C&D debris (concrete, asphalt, and wood waste) at
New England Ecological Development, a private facility located at the Johnston landfill. Wood waste
is chipped and eventually burned as fuel; asphalt and concrete are processed and reused as fill.
Tonnages of asphalt and yard waste recovered are not tracked on a City basis.
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables
All materials collected through Providence's municipal curbside program and from City schools are
brought to the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) near the Johnston landfill, approximately 15 miles
from the City, and are tipped for free. The processing center is owned by the State Solid Waste
Management Corporation (SWMC) and is operated by New England CRInc, a private company. (The
Solid Waste Management Corporation solicited three different contracts, for facility design,
construction, and the provision of equipment and operation of the plant)
The facility, which opened its doors in April 1989, is a 40,000-square-foot plant utilizing the
highly mechanized West German Bezner system. The facility's capital cost is estimated at $6 million,
with $2 million spent on equipment. The plant was built to process 120 tons of material per day in one
shift, or an estimated one-half of the State's recyclables. In 1990 the MRF was processing between 190
Page 142
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
and 240 tons of materials per day (58 percent paper and 42 percent commingled recyclables), in two
daily 8-hour shifts, 5 days per week.
Six different types of materials, collected through mandatory municipal collection, enter the MRF
in two streams: (1) newspaper; and (2) commingled bottles, cans, and plastic containers. The paper is
dumped on the floor and any kraft paper bags are removed by two workers. (According to the MRFs
operators, the removal of bags has reduced overall processing efficiency from 11 tons per hour to 6 tons
per hour.) The paper is moved via inclined conveyor to a hopper, baled, and automatically tied.
Commingled recyclables ascend via conveyor to an elevation of 20 feet above the tipping floor.
(The flow of recyclables is monitored by sensors and regulated so that materials are sent at an even
stream.) The recyclables are conveyed under a magnet that removes ferrous cans. The glass, metal, and
aluminum descend via the force of gravity. Materials are sorted by weight as they tumble through a
row of moving metal weights on chains. Glass, the only material heavy enough to fall through the
"chain curtain," is sent downward to a special sorting tray. An eddy current magnet runs over the
plastic and aluminum, charging the aluminum and causing it to fall in one direction. Plastic containers
continue their descent in another direction. A worker pulls off any nonplastic items, and separates out
the HOPE bottles. The PET bottles fall onto a conveyor belt. The glass, pulled by gravity falls over a
shaker-table with 2-inch-wide holes. Broken pieces of glass, fall through the holes and onto the
residue conveyor. Whole glass bottles continue along the conveyor to a sorting table where six workers
sort glass by color. Twenty-seven workers are employed at the MRF, approximately 10 on the
processing line.
Over 40 percent of all glass entering the facility breaks. Broken glass is landfilled, as is all other
MRF residue, which is estimated at 14 percent by weight of all material entering the MRF. The Glass
Packaging Institute has awarded the MRF a grant to research ways to reduce glass breakage. The
operators of the MRF maintain that about half of this breakage occurs en route, and that much glass
arrives at the plant already broken.
Bimetal and ferrous cans are shredded with an AMG Cutler shredder into steel "crumbs."
Aluminum is flattened. Glass is crushed to market specifications. PET bottles are perforated,
flattened, and baled whole. HOPE bottles are flaked with a granulator. Paper is sold overseas to
Japan, Taiwan, Holland, or Italy. Glass is sold to Anchor Glass in Dayville, Connecticut, Maine
Beverage, or Central NY Bottle Company. Tin and steel are sold to AMG Resources in Pittsburgh;
aluminum is sold to Reynolds Aluminum in Richmond, Virginia; and PET and HOPE plastics are sold to
Wellman in Johnsonville, South Carolina.
Annual operational costs of the MRF are estimated at $1.5 million, or $31.83 per ton, in 1990,
including residue disposal but excluding debt payment and facility depreciation. That year, the MRF
received approximately $1,349,113 in revenues from the sale of 41,300 tons of material (an average of
$32.67 per marketed ton). Fifty percent of this was for the sale of aluminum; yielding a net loss of
approximately $160,000. The State paid CRInc. approximately $1.1 million for operating the MRF,
and an additional $100,000 in revenue sharing (CRInc receives 10 percent of all revenue earned), and
$100,000 for shipping expenses.
Recyclables collected from commercial enterprises, institutions, and apartment buildings are
generally not brought to the MRF for processing. Private recyclers must market their materials
elsewhere, a task which can at times, be difficult. Paper and corrugated cardboard are brought to
paper brokers such as United Paper Stock in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Glass is sometimes sold to
Anchor Glass in Dayville, Connecticut. Securing viable recycling markets can sometimes pose problems
for local haulers. The State MRF serves as a "market of last resort" when no other markets are
available. Haulers bringing materials to the MRF are charged a fee equal to one-fourth of the State
tipping fee (at the Central landfill) for private haulers, which was $49 per ton in 1990.
Page 143
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
Market Development!:!Initiatives/Procurement
In October 1990, the Rhode bland DEM promulgated regulations establishing an official State
recycling emblem. Under the law, which goes into effect in November 1991, products must meet certain
designated criteria and definitions in order to use the recycling emblem or to print the terms "reusable,"
"recyclable/ or "recycled" on product labeling. A product cannot be promoted as reusable unless it can be
reused a minimum of five times through a program established by a manufacturer, retailer, or
distributor. A product can be advertised as recyclable only if it can be used in its entirety (excluding
labels, adhesives, and closures) for a feedstock and is either listed as a mandatory recycling material
(for residential or commercial programs) or returned to a specified agent to be recycled, achieving an in-
state recycling rate of SO percent A product can be labeled as recycled only if the label lists the
percentage by weight of pre- and post-consumer material. Rhode Island hopes that the use of the State
recycling emblem will increase demand for secondary materials, eliminate false market claims, and
stimulate the growth of secondary material markets.
Composting Activities
Providence does not have a composting program. Some private haulers drop off wood waste for
chipping at New England Ecological Development. These tonnages are not tracked, and wood chips are
eventually burned as a fuel source. In 1991 it became mandatory to recycle wood waste. Source
separation of leaves and yard debris will be mandatory in the Gty beginning January 1,1993.
In November 1991, the City began a pilot leaf collection program. BFI picks up bagged leaves in
packer trucks from 15,000 households on an every other week basis through December. Leaves are
brought for composting to a site managed by the Solid Waste Management Corporation (SWMC)
adjacent to the landfill. The material is formed into windrows and turned regularly. The City covers
the cost of the $15 per ton tipping fee and receives a $5 rebate per ton from the SWMC. BFI is not
currently charging the City for this pick-up service, perhaps because it hopes to receive the contract
when such collection is implemented citywide.
Also in the fall of 1991, the SWMC, the City of Providence, and the Southside Land Trust began a
joint venture to encourage backyard composting in the City of Providence. They will conduct workshops
to demonstrate backyard composting techniques on Southside Land Trust land, located in the City.
Page 144
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
Material
Newspaper
Corrugated Cardboard
High-grade Paper
Other Paper
Glass
PET Plastic
HOPE Plastic
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous Cans
Food Waste
Motor Oil
Scrap Metal
Batteries
Subtotal MSW Recycled
Subtotal MSW Composted
Total MSW Recovered
Total C&D Recovered
Residential
(Tons, 1990)
5,489
0
0
0
1,963
134
92
100
393
0
20
NA
NA
8,191
0
8,191
NA
Commercial/
Institutional
(Tons, 1990)*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8,700
NA
Total
(Tons, 1990)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
16,900
NA
Notes: Above tonnage represents collected material, included material broken during processing. In 1990 an additional 184 tons of
residue (not included in above figures) were collected through the municipal curbside program. This represents 2 percent of all
materials collected through the municipal program.
The tonnage of waste recovered from the commercial and institutional sectors in Providence was estimated using data obtained
from 34 of Providence's largest businesses. These 34 businesses recovered 3,862 tons of post-consumer waste in 1990, or 17.3
percent of their waste stream. Assuming that one-third of the commercial/institutional waste stream is being recovered at a 17.3
percent rate, another one-third at three-quarters this rate (about 13 percent), and the remaining one-third at half this rate (about 9
percent), we estimate that Providence recovered about 13 percent of its commercial/institutional waste in 1990.
Source Reduction Initiatives
Initiatives promoted in Providence to encourage solid waste source reduction are developed at the
state level. The State Department of Environmental Management (DEM) promotes source reduction of
commercial waste in its Handbook for Reduction and Recycling of Commercial Solid Waste. DEM
requires businesses to prepare a waste reduction and recycling plan that proposes how each portion of
the waste stream will be reduced and/or recycled. The Handbook suggests that offices use supplies and
equipment more efficiently, replace disposable materials with reusable, recyclable, and more durable
products, and increase use of recycled materials. However, the DEM is short-staffed and lacks the
capacity to enforce reporting and recycling requirements.
As described earlier, Rhode Island has just adopted use of a recycling emblem to identify and
promote products that are recyclable, recycled, and reusable.
Page 145
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
Publicity and Education
Prior to the implementation of its mandatory curbside program, the City of Providence held public
meetings to inform citizens about program details. Ads were placed in local newspapers to announce the
distribution of recycling containers and the onset of the pick-up program. Brochures printed in multiple
languages were mailed and distributed in blue bins, and the program received coverage on local TV and
radio.
The State DEM and SWMC have developed a variety of educational materials, some of which are
voluntarily used in Providence schools. These include a two-volume recycling curriculum put out by the
Ocean State Clean-up and Recycling (OSCAR) program of the DEM. The DEM distributes written
manuals to managers of multi-unit buildings and commercial enterprises with tips on reducing and
recycling solid waste.
Economics
Costs Coven
Providence does not incur any capital costs for the collection and
processing of recyclables. Costs listed below cover the City's expenses for
the curbside collection of 8,171 tons of residential recyclables from
households in one- to six-unit buildings in 1990, including the annual
contract fee paid to Chambers Waste Systems, and the City's
administrative and education and publicity costs. All costs for the
processing of Providence's recyclable materials are paid for by the State.
State capital expenditures for the purchase of recycling bins in Providence
are also provided below. State education and publicity costs for the
development of recycling in Providence are not available. Private
processing equipment is listed below, but a cost breakdown is not
available.
Capital Costs: Collection
Item
9 Labrie Trucks*
62,000 Recycling Binst
Cost
$630,000
307,648
Use
Recycling
Recycling
Year Incurred
1989
1989
Note: All equipment is paid off
*The recycling vehicles were paid for by the City's private recycling hauler, Chambers Waste Systems, using a portion of its annual
contract fee received from the city. After 3 years, the trucks become the domain of the City if Chambers Waste no longer serves
as the contracted recycling hauler.
^Bins were said for by the State.
Page 146
-------
Providence,: Rhode Island
Capital Costs: Processing
Item
Bezner Sorting Equipment
Boltegraf Baler
AMG Cutter Shredder
Cost
MA
NA
MA
Use
Recycling
Recycling
RecycOng
Year Incurred
1987
1987
1987
Note: All processing equipment is estimated to have cost $2 million, and the total cost of the MRF was $6 million. The SWMC
financed the capital costs of Ihe MRF with $3.8 million In bonds amortized over a 4 year period at a 9.25% interest rate.
Annual and Per Ton Operating and Maintenance Costs (FY1990)
Cost Tons Covered Per Ton Cost
Recycling Total $945,146 8,171 $116
Collection* $857,343 8,171 $105
Processingt 0 8,171 0
Administration 85,853 8,171 11
Education/Publicity* 1,950 8,171 0.23
Note: The costs presented are for fiscal year 1990, which runs from October 1989 to September 1990. The tonnage data presented
are for calendar year 1990.
The State reimbursed the City $738,345 from the above collection contract the City paid to Chambers Waste Systems (it deducts
Ihe savings to the City in averted tipping fees).
fThe State paid approximately $32 per ton to process Providence's recyclables excluding debt payment
*Most education/publicity material is published by the State.
Materials Revenues: None. Revenue is split between the private processors (New England
CRInc. and the SWMC.
Source of Funding: State Solid Waste Management Corporation
Full-time Employees: 2 City staff and 9 haulers under private contract
Part-time Employees: None
Future Solid Waste Management Plans
The Rhode Island Solid Waste Management Corporation, funded by tipping fees collected at State
disposal facilities, is experiencing financial difficulty. While Rhode Island is the first State to
mandate statewide recycling, it has not yet achieved its intended goal of including all municipalities
in the program.
Page 147
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
A Bag and Tag bill that would have mandated statewide, volume-based refuse collection rates was
introduced in the 1991 State legislative session. Although the DEM and the SWMC supported the bill,
it did not pass. The State hopes to reintroduce this bill.
In April 1991, amendments to State legislation were proposed that would double the list of
materials required to be recycled from commercial business. Among the materials that are now required
to be recycled are , lead-acid batteries, used lubricating oil, automobile hulks, white goods, leaves,
grass dippings, and other wastes (effective January 1993). In 1990 Rhode Island was the first of two
states to mandate telephone directory recycling. Effective January 1992, telephone directories can only
be disposed through the; DEM collection system. Providence is hoping to increase recycling
opportunities in the commercial sector and to begin a pilot composting program near the landfill in the
fall of 1991.
Contacts
John Reynolds
Recycling Coordinator
City of Providence
700 Aliens Avenue
Providence, RI 02905
Phone (401) 467-8855
Terri Bisson
Recycling Planner
Dept. of Environmental Management
83 Park Street, 5th Floor
Providence, RI 02903
Phone (401) 277-3434
Kent Waterman/Louis Vinagro
American Disposal
NEED/Vinagro Farms
13 Greenville Rd.
Johnston, RI 02919
Phone (401) 943-5719
Carole O. Bell
Principal Environmental Planner
Department of Environmental Management
83 Park Street
Providence, RI 02903
Phone (401) 277-3434
Fax (401)277-2591
Susan Sklar
Recycling Program Planner
Rhode Island Solid Waste Management Corp.
West Exchange Center
260 West Exchange Street
Providence, RI 02903
Phone (401) 831-4440
Fax (401) 861-0830
Jim Simoneau
Macera Brothers of Cranston, Inc.
511 Pippin Orchard Rd.
Cranston, RI 02921
Phone (401) 943-3330
Special thanks goes to John McCabe, a student at Brown University, for his research assistance on
commercial and institutional recycling programs.
Page 148
-------
Providence, Rhode Island
Referenced
McCabe, John. The State of Commercial Solid Waste Recycling in Rhode Island. Providence: Brown
University, Center for Environmental Studies, May 1991.
Ocean State Cleanup and Recycling Program (OSCAR). Guide for Preparing Commercial Solid Waste
Reduction and Recycling Plans. Department of Environmental Management, 1988.
Ocean State Cleanup and Recycling Program (OSCAR). Handbook for Reduction and Recycling of
Commercial Solid Waste. Department of Environmental Management.
Ocean State Cleanup and Recycling Program (OSCAR). Recycling in Rhode Island: A Blueprint for
Success. Department of Environmental Management, July 1989.
Salmando, Joe. "Rhode Island's State-of-the-Art Plant," Waste Age, September 1989.
Simoneau, Jim. (Macera Brothers, Cranston, RI). Personal conversation, June 26,1991.
Waterman, Kent (American Disposal, New England Ecological Development, Vinagro Farms, Johnston,
RI). Personal communication, June 27,1991.
Endnotes
\, James (Research Associate, Department of Plant Operations, Brown University), personal conversation, June 27,1991.
^Waterman, Kent (American Disposal (New England Ecology and Development, Vinagro Farms, Johnston, RI), personal
communication, June 27,1991.
Page 149
-------
Sm Francisco, California
Page 150
-------
Son Francisco, California
San Francisco,
California
Demographics
Jurisdiction:
Population;
Aiea:
Total Households:
Total Businesses:
Brief Description:
City of San Francisco
723,959 in 1990
49 square miles
328,471 (105,150 in single-family homes and 223,321 in multi-unit
buildings)
61,235 businesses and 900 nonprofit agencies
San Francisco, located on San Francisco Bay on the Pacific coast, is the
seventh largest city in the nation by population. Its population is
multicultural: 54 percent Caucasian; 29 percent Asian, 11 percent African-
American; 6 percent are of other races, and 14 percent of the total
population is of Hispanic origin. Per capita income in San Francisco was
$15,137 in 1990; mean annual household income was $41,200, and median
annual household income was $28,530.
Page 151
-------
San Frandax,
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
ch
Annual Tonnages (1990)
Commercial/
Residential
Recovered*
Recycled
Composted*
Disposed
Incinerated*
Landfilled
113,739
106,712
7,027
194,360
4,249
190,111
Institutional
70,829
68,971
1,858
321,935
8,262
313,673
Other
Self-Haul
2,160
2,160
0
15,845
2.840
13,005
Total
MSW
186,728
177,843
8,885
532,140
15,351
516,789
Construction Total
& Demolition Waste
12,428
12,428
0
15,076
0
15,076
199,156
190,271
8,885
547,216
15,351
531,865
Generated 308,099 392,764 18,005 718,868
Percent by Weight Recovered^
27,504 746,372
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
37%
35%
2%
18%
18%
»•
12%
12%
0%
26%
25%
1%
45%
45%
0%
27%
25%
1%
'Residential materials recovered in 1990 include recyclable materials collected at curbside, through drop-off and buy-back centers
and some bulky items self-hauled to the transfer station. Commercial tons include materials collected from office buildings,
retailers, restaurants, and bars. Other sett-haul tonnages consist of materials brought to the public disposal and recycling area at
the transfer station and are derived from both residential and commercial waste streams. Much of the data comes from a waste
composition of San Francisco's waste stream by the consulting firm, Brown, Vence and Associates.!
^Residential waste composted includes 4.414 tons of food waste and 2,164 tons of yard waste reported to have been composted in
residents' backyards, 400 tons self hauled to compost facilities and 49 tons of Christmas trees which were chipped and used as
mulch. Commercial waste composted includes 850 tons of waste that was composted privately and 1,008 tons collected by the City
Departments.
*Wood waste, including 8,262 tons of commercially-generated wood, is burned for fuel.
§Numbers may not add due to rounding.
"Less than 1 percent
Transfer Station Tipping
Fee:
Refuse Collection and
Disposal:
$45.20 per ton in 1990; $52.62 as of October 1991. This fee covers transfer
station costs, transportation to landfill, landfill disposal costs, host
community fees, and solid waste planning costs. The fees are set by the
City's Refuse Collection and Disposal Rate Board.
Golden Gate Disposal and Sunset Scavenger have collected refuse from
the residential and commercial sectors in the City since the early 1900s.
Golden Gate serves the downtown/financial district and Sunset Scavenger
serves the balance of the City. The two companies, which merged under
Norcal Waste Systems, Inc., in 1987, are protected by a 1932 ordinance
Page 152
-------
San Francisco, California
Total Waste Recovered and Disposed (Percent by Weight, 1990)
Disposed 73%
Recovered 27%
Residential Disposed 26%
C&D Disposed 2%
Residential Recycled 14%
Residential Composted 1%
C&D Recycled 2%
Comm/lnst Recycled 9%
Comm/lnst Disposed 43%
Mote: Due to rounding, numbers do not add to 100%.
Self-Haul Disposed 2%
Refuse Collection and
Disposal (cont'd):
that authorizes them to collect refuse on specific routes in the City.
Other companies may pick up refuse but must first obtain a permit from
the City's Department of Public Health. To date none has applied.
Under the ordinance, other companies do not need a permit to collect
construction and demolition debris and other waste that has a commercial
value (such as used beverage containers, paper, and scrap metal); more
than 30 companies collect such waste. Refuse is delivered to a transfer
station operated by Sanitary Fill, also a subsidiary of Norcal, prior to
being long-hauled to the Altamont Landfill in Alameda County,
approximately 60 miles from San Francisco.
Residents pay the collection companies on a per-can basis for refuse
collection and disposal: $8.49 per month for one 32-gallon can, and $3.86
per month for each additional can. Recydables are collected at no charge.
New rates went into effect as of October 1991: $935 per month for a 32-
gallon can plus $4.24 for each additional can, $8.03 per month for a 20-
gallon mini-can ($7.19 per month for residents 65 years old or older).
Page 153
-------
San Francisco, Lalifornut
Materials Recovery Overview
Goals and Legislative San Francisco's 1988 Solid Waste Management Plan targeted solid waste
Requirements: diversion goals through source reduction, recycling, and composting of 32
percent of the City's waste stream by 1992 and 43 percent by 2002. In
September 1989, the California legislature passed the Integrated Waste
Management Act (AB939), effective January 1990. The Act requires
counties and incorporated cities within those counties to prepare
-Integrated Waste Management Plans, and sets State goals at 25 percent
solid waste reduction by 1995 and 50 percent reduction by 2000. After the
passage of AB939, San Francisco updated its goals to make them
consistent with the State law. In 1986, the California legislature enacted
a bottle bill (AB2020).
The City of San Francisco has taken a multifaceted approach to its solid waste problem. In
addition to residential and commercial sector curbside recycling, its programs encompass phone book
recycling, recycling glass from bars and restaurants, promoting backyard composting, and educating
residents to pay attention to the environmental impacts of products when they shop.
San Francisco has a long history of recycling, dating to the turn of the century. Golden Gate
Disposal and Sunset Scavenger evolved from the old Scavengers Protective Association, a league of
immigrants that paid the City for the rights to collect refuse on a given route. The scavengers had a
long tradition of hand-separating wastes in open trucks into paper products, wet products, and a mixture
of glass, rags, and metals. The advent of packer trucks for refuse collection in the late 1950s rendered
the practice of recovering recyclables on the truck impractical and uneconomical. In 1967 the two
companies terminated all but their paper and metals recycling programs.
The first community recycling center in San Francisco opened in 1970, accepting newspaper, glass,
and cans. Other community drop-off centers opened over the next several years. By 1980 the nine
community recycling centers then existing formed a nonprofit corporation called the San Francisco
Community Recyclers (SFCR). Today the San Francisco Community Recyclers operates five buy-back
centers. In addition to the SFCR, the Haight-Ashbury Neighborhood Council (HANC), Richmond
Environmental Action (REA), and Goodwill Industries in conjunction with Norcal each operate viable
multimaterial drop-off and buy-back centers in the City, and promote recycling at special events.
In 1980, under the direction of the Chief Administrative Officer, the City established the San
Francisco Recycling Program (SFRP) as a division of its Solid Waste Management Program. Designed to
facilitate and encourage recycling in the City, the SFRP has developed programs around the existing
private sector recycling activities. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution in
September 1979, directing the City to establish a long-term solid waste management program including
municipal solid waste combustion, landfilling,rand recycling. As part of the long-term strategy to
reduce solid waste in the City, the Board in 1983 selected Combustion Engineering (C-E) to site, permit,
and finance the construction of an incinerator for municipal solid waste from the Bay area. But in May
1987, the Board voted to suspend negotiation of a contract with C-E due to public concern about air
emissions, ash disposal, project economics, and the negative impact the project would have on recycling.
The City, working with the refuse haulers and recycling centers, applied for a State grant to fund
numerous recycling programs. In July 1981, the State awarded the City two grants: $120,000 for the
start-up of several buy-back centers with local community recycling groups, and $20,000 to start an
apartment building recycling program at a high-rise apartment complex. During the fall of 1980, the
City hired a full-time recycling manager and the SFRP initiated the first of its pilot programs—a
white office paper recovery program in City Hall. By the end of the year. City Hall had reduced its
garbage by one-third.
Page 154
-------
San Francisco, California
At the suggestion of the recycling community, the City in 1982 established an ongoing fund, the
Recycling Development Fund, to initiate and expand recycling ventures. The intent of the fund was to
offer grants to promising private and nonprofit recycling projects. Funding for this program was
$100,000 per year for fiscal years 1982 through 1986, but was discontinued in 1986. San Francisco
continues to fund various recycling and waste reduction activities through its solid waste budget. The
City granted monies to the San Frandsco League of Urban Gardeners to start a backyard composting
program. In 1991 the City awarded $30,000 in funding for a feasibility study on the creation of a center
in the City for manufacturing and selling goods created from discarded materials.
In November 1981, the City, the two collection companies (Golden Gate Disposal and Sunset
Scavenger), and Sanitary Fill began a residential curbside pilot program collecting newspaper, glass,
and aluminum cans from 3,500 single-family homes in the Sunset District. The program was
discontinued because of illegal scavenging and lack of commitment by the management of the collection
companies. An advisory committee to the Chief Administrative Officer, consisting of representatives
from the City, the refuse collection companies, nonprofit recyclers, environmental organizations such as
Sierra dub and EDF, and end users of recyclable material, such as Owens-Brockway and Reynolds, was
established to help develop a new curbside program. In April 1989, the City initiated the current
curbside recycling program, with Sunset Scavenger as the primary service provider under contract with
the City. The program was implemented in four phases. Phase I of the program began with collection
of newspaper, corrugated cardboard, mixed and high-grade paper, and commingled bottles and cans
from 29,000 households in the southern section of the City. As of November 1990,154,000 households
were being served, and approximately 15,000 households in 1,000 apartment buildings. By the fall of
1991, the program is projected to reach 172,000 households and at least 5,000 apartment buildings.
The San Francisco Recycling Program has received repeated acclaim for its public education and
sponsorship of private recycling activities. In 1990 the National Recycling Coalition named San
Francisco's program the Best Urban Recycling Program. In the same year, the California Department of
Conservation granted an award to the City for its outstanding recycling education program.
Recycling Activities
Residential Curbside Recycling
Start-up Date: Pilot program began in November 1981 and ended in November 1986. The
present San Francisco curbside program began in April 1989.
Service Provider: Sunset Scavenger in conjunction with Golden Gate Disposal provide
service under contract with the City. Both Sunset Scavenger and Golden
Gate Disposal are subsidiaries of Norcal Waste Systems, Inc.
Pick-up Frequency: Weekly
Same Day as Refuse: Yes. The majority receive same-day service.
Households Served: 29,000 households from April 1989 to April 1990; expanded by phases to
154,000 households in one- through five-unit buildings, and 1,000 multi-
unit buildings (of six or more units) as of November 1990.
Mandatory: No
Participation Rate: 50 percent weekly set-out rate in 1990. From this data, the Recycling
Manager estimates an 80 percent monthly participation rate.
Page 155
-------
Son Francisco, California
Materials Collected:
Set-out Method:
Collection Method and
Vehicles:
Economic Incentives:
Enforcement
Annual Tonnage
Newspapers, corrugated cardboard, high-grade paper, magazines, junk
mail, phone books, glass containers, aluminum cans, tin cans, bimetal cans,
aluminum foil, and PET plastics
Residents are asked to place paper goods (old newsprint, corrugated
cardboard, high-grade ledger, magazines, junk mail, and phone books) in
paper bags, and commingled glass, plastic bottles, and aluminum cans in
12-gallon plastic bins. The bins, made of at least 10 percent postconsumer
plastic, are supplied by the hauler. Larger apartment buildings are
provided with 60- and 90-gaUon containers as needed; these are placed in
central locations in each building.
Lodal 31-cubic-yard two-compartment Bi-Loader collection vehicles are
used to collect recyclable materials. The model was in part designed by
Sunset Scavenger to accommodate collection on the hills of San Francisco.
It has a shorter wheel base for better maneuverability and handling on
hills, and loads from both sides to improve collection efficiency on narrow
streets. .Generally, one person collects the materials, placing paper in one
compartment and commingled bottles and cans in the other.
The variable refuse rate provides an economic incentive for residents to
recycle. As a result of the success of the curbside program, San Francisco
introduced a 20-gallon "mini-can" for refuse in October 1991.
An anti-scavenging ordinance has been in effect since April 1990. As of
September 1991, four citations have been issued and two arrests have been
made.
21,463 tons in 1990. With the curbside program fully phased in, the City
estimates that it is recovering 55,000 tons per year. In September 1991,
4,500 tons were collected through the residential curbside program.
Commercial & Institutional Curb side/Alley Recycling
Legislative
Requirements:
Service Providers:
Number Served:
None
Golden Gate Disposal and Sunset Scavenger, the primary refuse haulers
collect recyclables from their commercial refuse customers. West Coast
Salvage and Recycling, also a subsidiary of Norcal, and an additional 30
for-profit and nonprofit companies collect recyclables from the
commercial sector.
Golden Gate Disposal serves approximately 500 accounts. Of these,
approximately 200 are retailers served with corrugated cardboard
collection and 300 are bars, restaurants, and hotels receiving glass bottle
and aluminum can collection. The recycling manager estimates that each
account has an average of at least five tenants. Sunset Scavenger serves
approximately 1,000 businesses, of which 220 are the Bar and Restaurant
Glass Recycling Program customers. West Coast Salvage serves over 100
buildings, with an average of 20 to 30 commercial tenants in each.
Information was not available from other haulers.
Page 156
-------
Sen Francisco, California
Type Served:
Materials Collected:
Pick-up Frequency:
Set-out and Collection
Method:
Incentives:
Annual Tonnage
Golden Gate Disposal and Sunset Scavenger serve small and large
businesses, all major hospitals, schools, hotels, bars, and restaurants.
Golden Gate serves more large accounts because its collection route is in
the downtown/financial district of the City. West Coast Salvage and
Recycling services primarily high-rise office buildings. The Association
for Retarded Citizens consolidates recyclable materials from City Hall.
Other community groups collect from some small and large commercial
establishments. Over 30 independent collectors pick up recyclable
materials from small and large commercial establishments.
Golden Gate and Sunset Scavenger collect corrugated cardboard,
newspaper, glass, and aluminum cans, and sponsor a 1-day phone book
collection. In 1991 both companies began accepting mixed waste paper.
West Coast collects primarily high-grade office paper. Over 30
independent haulers collect glass, and different grades of paper, including
telephone books.
Varies from once every two weeks to six times a week. Golden Gate and
Sunset Scavenger collect glass from their Bar and Restaurant Glass
Program customers up to four times per week, and collect corrugated
cardboard up to six times per week.
Golden Gate Disposal provides 60- and 90-gallon toters, and 1-, 1.5- and 2-
cubic-yard bins as needed to customers. Corrugated cardboard and
newspapers are commingled in a toter or bin, separate from refuse. Some
retailers bale cardboard and haul it to their distribution center for pick-
up. Bars and restaurants commingle three colors of glass with aluminum
cans in plastic wheel bins or metal containers. Golden Gate collects
newspaper in packer trucks and glass in a 30-cubic-yard top-loading
vehicle. West Coast Salvage and Recycling paper customers are asked to
separate white ledger and computer paper from colored ledger and mixed
paper.
Sunset Scavenger also provides 60- and 90-gallon toters to customers.
Recyclables are collected in four rear-loading packer trucks and a
converted top-loading truck. Three of the rear-loading trucks are used to
collect corrugated cardboard (200 tons per month), and one is used to
collect mixed paper. The 22-cubic-yard top-loading truck is a converted
tallow truck with a front-loader fork for collection of commingled glass
from bars and restaurants.
Bar and restaurant glass accounts received a volume-based rebate on the
glass that is recycled. In mid-1990 this rebate was $36.50 per ton. Golden
Gate and Sunset Scavenger discontinued the rebate in September 1991.
Both companies offer a reduced refuse collection rate to bars and
restaurants that recycle containers with other recycling companies, based
on the reduction in volume collected.
Golden Gate and Sunset Scavenger collected an estimated 3,500 tons of
glass and cans in 1990, paying over $100,000 in rebates to participating
bars and restaurants. Additional tonnages are recovered from the
commercial sector but cannot be divided between curbside and self-haul
recycling activities.
Because the bulk of the growth in solid waste generated is anticipated to come from the commercial
sector, SFRP heavily promotes both government and private sector commercial recycling. All
Page 157
-------
Son Fnmcuco,
government offices recycle office paper. A full-time staff person at SFRP coordinates Gty government
office recycling efforts and provides businesses with free consulting services on how to set up office
waste reduction and recycling programs. The SFRP also provides desktop recycling boxes and staffs a
recycling hotline.
In 1985 Golden Gate Disposal and Sunset Scavenger, together with the Haight Ashbury
Neighborhood Council (a nonprofit group) with a matching grant from the City, initiated the Bar and
Restaurant Glass Recycling Program. Until September 1991, high volume "producers" received rebates
from hauling fees from Sunset Scavenger and Golden Gate Disposal for separating commingled glass
from regular refuse. These haulers would like to continue to provide container collection to these
companies, but are facing increasing obstacles. Golden Gate Disposal's recycling manager estimates
that 30 percent (by weight) of the commingled material was lost to theft in the beginning of 1990.
Moreover, according to her figures, the company incurred several thousand dollars in damages to toters
and bins during this period. The recycling manager directly correlates this rise in scavenging with the
increase in California container redemption value from 15 to 25 cents in January 1990. Customers have
since been asked to pin bins indoors or in a secured area. Golden Gate had to terminate service to an
estimated 15 percent of its Bar and Restaurant Glass accounts due to a high scavenging rate and
inability to secure containers to prevent further scavenging, hi addition, end users of glass are becoming
more reluctant to accept the glass generated by bars and restaurants, since it is not sorted by color.
Golden Gate Disposal and Sunset Scavenger also recover high-grade paper from refuse generated by
businesses in the downtown/financial district of San Francisco. These businesses either are not recycling
or are not recovering a significant amount of their waste stream. The mixed waste is brought to a
processing center, where the high-grade paper is separated from refuse.
Self-haul and Drop-off Centers
Number and Type More than 30 privately operated buy-back and drop-off centers
Public or Private: Private. Norcal Waste Systems owns and operates Sanitary Fill Transfer
Station. West Coast Salvage and Recycling, a subsidiary of Norcal, owns
and operates two multimaterial buy-back centers, and three buy-backs for
California Redemption Value containers. It also owns five buy-backs
that are operated by Goodwill Industries. The nonprofit San Francisco
Community Recyclers (SFCR) operates three buy-back centers. Haight-
Ashbury Neighborhood Council and Richmond Environmental Action
each operate a site.
Sectors Served: Residential and commercial/institutional
Materials Accepted: California Redemption Value beverage containers, glass bottles and jars,
whole wine bottles, tin and bimetal cans, PET and HDPE plastic,
computer and high-grade paper, newspaper, corrugated cardboard,
clothing, small electrical appliances, kitchenwares, paint, polystyrene
packing peanuts, used motor oil, auto batteries, and household-generated
hazardous waste
Annual Tonnage: An estimated 74515 tons of residential recydables were collected through
various drop-off sites in 1990. An additional 2,160 tons of recyclables
were collected from the residential and commercial sectors at the public
disposal and recycling area.
Drop-off is a primary method of recyclables collection in San Francisco, particularly in 1990 when
the curbside program was not yet fully implemented.
Page 158
-------
San Francisco, California
More than 30 State-certified drop-off or buy-back centers are now operated by a variety of
community and private groups. Independent community drop-off recycling centers in San Francisco date
back to 1970, when the first was opened to accept newspapers, glass, and aluminum cans. The Haight-
Ashbury Neighborhood Council and the Richmond Environmental Action each operate a buy-back
center. Together with Golden Gate and Sunset Scavenger, the San Francisco Solid Waste Management
Program sponsors the Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility, one of the first of its kind in the
U.S. It adjoins the City's solid waste transfer station and accepts materials from residents 3 days a
week, year round. While this facility addresses the responsible disposal of such wastes by residents,
the City's educational materials address non-toxic alternatives as well.
Construction & Demolition Debris
Construction and demolition debris is reclaimed at the Sanitary Fill Transfer Station. According to
Kelly Runyon of Sanitary Fill, approximately 100 tons of C&D per day are processed at the transfer
station. Of the total C&D debris coming into the transfer station, 75 percent is recovered for use in road
resurfacing and new construction. Of mis, approximately 40 percent is rock and dirt, 20 percent is wood,
and 15 percent is scrap metal. In 1989,11,800 tons of asphalt and concrete were recovered at the transfer
station; 12,428 tons of these materials were reclaimed in 1990. Five other companies in San Francisco
offer debris box service for the reclamation of construction and demolition debris.
According to the City's Recycling Coordinator, all construction and demolition debris from the
collapse of the Embarcadero Freeway in the October 1989 earthquake was recycled. When the City
called for bids on reconstruction of the freeway, most estimates were around $8 million. The company
that was awarded the contract bid $3.2 million on the reconstruction and claimed it was able to do so
because it was using recycled asphalt and concrete.
Salvage/Reuse
Goodwill Industries operates five buy-back and donation centers in San Francisco and accepts used
clothing and housewares. Other thrift shops accept used clothing, appliances, and furniture.
ENCORE! in Richmond, California accepts wine bottles at its facility. The bottles are rewashed and
sold for reuse to wineries throughout the U.S., although the biggest customers are in Napa Valley,
California. The City is providing start-up funds to SCRAP (Scroungers Center for Reusable Arts Parts),
a non-profit group that will collect discarded materials and provide them to artists and schools for art
projects.
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables
West Coast Salvage and Recycling is the largest materials processing operation in the Bay Area.
The Company, like the two primary haulers of refuse and recyclables, Sunset Scavenger and Golden
Gate Disposal, is a subsidiary of Norcal Waste Systems, Inc. West Coast has three intermediate
processing centers: the Total Urban Recycling Facility (TURF), the Bayshore facility, and the 350
Rhode Island facility.
Materials collected at curbside from the residential sector are brought to the Total Urban Recycling
Facility and the adjacent Bayshore facility. These companies are located on the southeastern border of
San Francisco, an average distance of 3 to 5 miles from residential curbside collection routes.
Commingled glass, aluminum and plastic bottles brought in by Sunset Scavenger are tipped onto a main
floor at the TURF and scooped with a front-end loader onto a shaker screen, where crushed glass and
small contaminants fall through. The material is then conveyed onto a sorting belt where laborers
hand-pick California Redemption Value PET and other plastics, and remove larger contaminants.
Page 159
-------
San Francisco, California
Material passes over a magnet where tin is pulled off, and over an air classifier, which blows the
aluminum cans off of the conveyor. Three laborers color-sort the glass and pull out contaminants.
Mixed waste paper, corrugated cardboard, and high-grade paper from the residential curbside
program, and from Golden Gate Disposal's and Sunset Scavenger's commercial accounts, are processed at
the Bayshore facility. Corrugated cardboard and kraft paper bags are pulled out by hand, then baled.
High-grade paper is separated out from mixed paper; the two grades are then baled separately.
Mixed glass collected by Golden Gate and Sunset Scavenger through the bar and restaurant
collection program is brought to TURF. (In 1991 the material was shipped directly to a broker, Oreo
Glass.) Color-sorted glass from West Coast's buy-back centers is brought to the 350 Rhode Island
facility in debris boxes and shipped in trucks, which carry between 20 and 25 tons of glass to regional
markets such as No-Cal Benefidation, Owens-Brockway, and CalCRINC. Other recyclable materials
collected from commercial accounts, such as aluminum cans and PET plastics, are processed at the 350
Rhode Island facility, located in downtown San Francisco. PET plastics and aluminum cans accepted at
buy-back sites located throughout the City are also processed at the Rhode Island processing center.
Aluminum cans are baled or densih'ed (40-pound blocks) and sold to Reynolds, Alcoa, or other
vendors. Tin cans are sold to Prolar in Lathrup, California, about 150 miles from San Francisco. PET is
sold to brokers. The majority of cardboard, newspaper, and mixed waste paper is sold to overseas
markets.
According to Maureen Hart, general manager of West Coast Salvage and Recycling, the three
facilities combined were processing approximately 450 tons per day in September 1991. Of these,
approximately 200 tons per day were from the residential curbside program (at that time fully phased
in). TURF operated two 8-hour shifts; Bayshore operates for 10 hours, 6 days per week; and 350 Rhode
Island operates 24 hours a day. In all there are 102 people employed at the three facilities,
approximately 11 were hired from the San Francisco Conservation Corps, a jobs training program; and
15 work in administration.
Most of the community drop-off/buy-back centers process and market their own materials. The
SFCR ships glass in 30-cubic-yard roll-off containers to No-Cal and CalCRINC. Aluminum cans are
flattened and sold to Alcoa or Reynolds Aluminum. Corrugated cardboard is sold to a local paper
broker. Newspaper and mixed paper are sold to West Coast Salvage and Recycling.
Wood debris is hauled to a site adjacent to the transfer station, where Sanitary Fill separates wood
and dirt, grinds the wood, and sells the wood chips as a fuel for electricity generation to two companies
in the Bay Area. Sanitary Fill also provides dirt free of charge as an interim landfill cover. In the
1980's Sanitary Fill assisted in the start-up of West Bay Metals, a business that removes ferrous metals
from the waste stream at the transfer station. Motor oil is re-refined at local refineries. Tallow
renderers collect grease and bones from restaurants and other businesses. Most of their finished product
is sold overseas.
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement
Although the SFRP has commissioned market studies for the recyclables collected at curbside,
marketing and market development are generally left to the collection companies. However, the
curbside collection contract between the City and Norcal (Golden Gate/Sunset Scavenger) allows the
City to redirect recyclables to new markets for market development. SFRP also acts as a facilitator
between the markets and the private companies and nonprofit community recyders.
The Program has used City government offices to spearhead efforts for increased purchases of
reusable, recycled, and recyclable products. SFRP is developing City procurement policies for paper,
oil, building products and tires. To date, however, there is no legislation related to procurement. SFRP
is planning to complete a purchasing guide that includes a list of recommended products and recycling
definitions. The guide will be made available to local businesses so that they may implement a "buy-
recycled" program.
Page 160
-------
San Francisco, California
Composting Activities
Although the City does not offer curbside collection of yard waste, it is addressing recovery of
organic wastes on several fronts. In addition to funding and working closely with the San Francisco
League of Urban Gardeners (SLUG) to promote backyard composting, the City is reevaluating its current
approach to hauling and landfilling food wastes, which amount to 30.9 percent by weight of the
residential waste disposed and 19 percent by weight of commercial waste disposed.
Backyard Composting
hi 1988 SFRP began working with SLUG to develop a home composting program for the City. While
SFRP designs and promotes the program, SLUG is responsible for its implementation. SFRP granted
SLUG $25,000 for its first year of work on the project, which included conducting workshops for the
general public, developing and disseminating related educational materials, staffing a compost
education center at SLUG'S Garden for the Environment, and maintaining the "rotline," a composting
hotline. Carl Grimm, education director of SLUG, reports that during the first year of the program,
more man 300 people learned home composting at SLUG workshops, more than 3,000 persons took the
self-guided tour at the compost education center, and more than 10,000 brochures were distributed.
In the summer of 1990, SLUG held composting workshops, and produced 30,000 "How To Compost"
brochures. During this period, SLUG began vermicomposting workshops, where residents pay $35 for
instruction, a worm bin, and worms. The response has been very positive, with waiting list only space
available.
In the third year of its home composting program, the SFRP has budgeted $80,000 to include a
master composter program and bin distribution program. In addition the SFRP is taking advantage of
the City's decision to offer a mini-can for refuse collection by encouraging residents who are switching to
the mini-can to use their old garbage cans for backyard composting. The SFRP will begin offering
workshops in Spanish and Cantonese and the SFRP is putting money toward expanding SLUG'S
composting education center. SFRP advertises the home composting program on bus shelter signs and
posters in buses and is tailoring promotions to encourage more participation from residents in other parts
of the City.
ZooDoo Composting
Since 1989, following the lead of New York's Bronx Zoo, the nonprofit Urban Resource Systems Inc.
began composting zoo animals' manure and bedding material to produce a marketable compost product
called "ZooDoo." Funded initially by a $58,000 grant from the SFRP and three foundations, the project
saved money in landfill tipping fees and recycled a valuable resource. The City provided a total of
approximately $100,000 in funding over the three years of the program. Since 1989 the City's
Recreation and Parks Department, under whose jurisdiction the Zoo falls, has been hauling the manure
to its composting site in Golden Gate Park.
TreeCycling Program
The SFRP initiated a Christmas TreeCycling" program in January 1988. One thousand of the 30,000
trees sold that season were chipped by the City and recycled as mulch or used as fuel. In the 1990-91
season, more than 26,000 trees—nearly 50 percent of the 53,000 trees sold—were recycled. Various
promotional efforts, including the distribution of handouts to tree-selling sites and curbside collection
of trees in a small area of the City, have contributed to the program's success. Trees were returned to
Page 161
-------
San Francisco, California
two public drop-off sites for on-the-spot chipping (with residents receiving the mulch) or to bins at five
recycling sites operated by private groups, which chipped the trees for sale as a fuel. A total of 26,500
trees (172 tons) were collected during the 1989-90 Christmas season. Of these, 49 tons of trees were
chipped and the remaining 123 tons were burned.
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
Material
Newspaper
Corrugated Cardboard
High-grade Paper
Other Paper
CA Redemption Glass*
Other Glass
HOPE Plastic
PET Plastic*
Other Plastics
Aluminum Cans*
Ferrous Metal
Nonferrous Metal
White Goods/Appliances
Textiles
Tires
Fat, Grease, and Bones
Household Hazardous Materials
Subtotal MSW Recycled
Food Waste
Yard Waste
Christmas Trees
Subtotal MSW Composted
Total MSW Recovered
Asphalt/Concrete
Total C&D Recovered
Total Materials Recycled
Total Materials Composted
Total Materials Recovered
Comm/
Residential Institutional Other* Total
(Tons, 1990) (Tons, 1989) (Tons, 1989) (Tons, 1989)
52,085
15,754
9,963
10,578
5,704
3,470
8
152
12
1,665
1,768
62
3,521
1,814
156
106,712
4,414
2,564
49
7,027
113,739
106,712
7,027
113,739
866
9,928
9.227
24,019
19,797
332
13
200
585
4
52
3,948
68,971
1,858
1,858
70,829
68,971
1,858
70,829
250
40
20
1,850
2,160
0
2,160
12,428
12,428
14,588
0
14,588
52.951
25,932
19,190
34,597
25,541
3,822
8
152
12
1,678
3,818
647
3,525
1,814
52
3,948
156
177,843
4,414
4.520
49
8,885
186,728
12,428
12,428
190,271
8,885
199,156
Mote: Residential materials include tons collected through the municipally sponsored curbskte program, self-hauled to drop-off
centers, and to the transfer station in 1990. Tonnages of wood burned as fuel are excluded, as is recovered manure.
* Other municipal solid waste includes corrugated cardboard, glass, ferrous scrap, and wood collected at the transfer station from
debris boxes and from a public self-haul area on the site.
t Most of these containers are recovered as a result of the bottle bill.
Page 162
-------
Son Francisco, California
Source Reduction Initiatives
Source reduction efforts include volume-based refuse rates and "environmental shopping" publicity
and education. Homeowners pay $8.49 per month for one 32-gallon refuse can and $3.86 for each
additional can. Rates were increased and 20-gallon mini-can was added effective October 1991, both
are expected to encourage increased participation in the recycling programs. The "It's Easier Than You
Think" campaign, initiated in 1986, emphasized the use of brown paper bags to store and cany
recyclables and encouraged people to ask for paper bags at the supermarket. In 1990 Safeway Stores
promoted an "environmental shopping" campaign in its stores and paid for billboards and bus signs
designed by the SFRP. More than 70,000 "environmental shopping" guides were distributed from May
1990 through the summer of 1991. The City sponsored a "Grocery Decent Program" in conjunction with
Safeway Stores to educate shoppers on ways that they could reduce waste at the source. Two persons
staffed booths located at five stores throughout the City. The City also provides educational
materials that suggest non-toxic alternatives to household hazardous wastes, and offers waste
reduction guides to offices.
Publicity and Education
While the SFRP promotes recycling through coordination of existing programs and the planning
and facilitation of new ones, its main thrust is public education. Since recycling opportunities are
widely available throughout the City, the Program's challenge is to maximize the number of people
taking advantage of such opportunities. To this end, SFRP has targeted a variety of demographic and
community groups, and has tapped the expertise of various businesses.
In 1986 SFRP awarded $20,000 each to four public relations firms to promote recycling in four
separate communities in the City. The first program promoted a "cash-for-trash" theme in the low-
and middle-income Bayview-Hunter's Point area. The second targeted Hispanic residents via
Spanish-speaking radio and TV stations. The third program, "Recycle for Life," targeted the gay and
lesbian communities, encouraging recyclers to donate their recycling proceeds to the AIDS Foundation.
The fourth campaign, "It's Easier Than You Think," targeted the ethnically mixed, middle-class
Richmond/Sunset District, explaining how and where to recycle. This campaign was extended
citywide in 1986-87. In 1988 a Newspaper Recycling Starter Kit was distributed to 119,000 households
with the daily newspaper to encourage recycling.
In 1987 the SFRP hired a Recycling Education Coordinator to introduce a K-5 curriculum, developed
in accordance with the State's Science Frameworks Guidelines, that would use recycling activities to
teach science. The Coordinator also helps schools set up their own recycling programs, gives
presentations to classes and faculty, and leads field trips to the transfer station and recycling centers.
The School Education Program maintains a library of recycling curricula from other states and various
teaching materials, including books and videos. A curriculum for grades 6 through 12 will be available
in late 1991. More than 1,000 teachers in the City's seventy-three elementary schools use the K-5
curriculum, and most schools have started recycling programs.
In the 1990-91 school year, SFRP sponsored 60 performances of the play, "Garbage is My Bag." The
main character in the play, Dr. T, has a Ph.D in Garbology, and through audience participation
highlights the benefits of recycling and encourages students to find innovative ways to use garbage. An
additional 60 performances are slated for the 1991-92 school years.
SFRP has worked with Safeway Stores to promote "environmental shopping" and with Pacific Bell
to encourage phone book recycling. In 1990 the City, coordinating with Pacific Bell, printed a recycling
message on the bags used to distribute phone books. The phone company coordinated a mailing urging
businesses receiving more than 300 sets of phone books to recycle, and included a four-page insert on
recycling in the yellow pages.
Page 163
-------
Son Francisco, Califc ait
« Many of SFRP's educational and motivational materials are available in English, Spanish, and
'Chinese, including public service advertising on radio and TV, buses, transit stations, and billboards.
Recycling information appears monthly in various southeast Asian language newspapers, and a media
relations consultant channels news and feature stories to the media.
*o th
•'V
Economics
Costs Coven Costs cover administration associated with program development, the promotion
of recycling projects, public outreach, and grants. Other costs, including capital
costs and operating and maintenance costs, are incurred by the private sector or
directly by residents, not the City.
West Coast Salvage and Recycling, the largest materials processor in the Bay
area (also a Norcal Waste Systems company), would not provide information on
capital equipment or O&M costs.
SFRP was set up in 1980 as part of the City's Solid Waste Management Program to facilitate and
encourage recycling in the City. From an initial budget in 1980-81 of $100,000, the SFRP grew to account
for almost half, or $900300, of the SWMP's budget in 1990; of the balance, $610,000 was allocated to
the Household Hazardous Waste Program, and $490,000 to solid waste administration and planning.
Estimated costs of the residential curbside program total $8.8 million. The program will recoup
$1.8 million in revenues from the sale of materials. All revenues from the sale of materials are rolled
back into the program to offset costs. If the revenues exceed the amount estimated for rate-making
purposes, residents will receive a reimbursement on their garbage bill for this amount, which is
calculated on a quarterly basis. If the revenues fall below the estimated minimum, the garbage
companies absorb that cost until such time as they think it is necessary to apply for a rate adjustment
Capital Costs; Sunset Scavenger/Golden Gate Recycling Collection
Item Cost Use Year Incurred
5 Rear-loading Packer Trucks* $500,000 Commercial Recycling NA
54 Lodal Bi-toader Recycling Trucks @ $4,590,000 CurbsideRecycling 1989
$85,000
2 Top-loading Packer Trucks© $140,000 Commercial Recycling 1990-1991
$70,000
30-cubic-yard Roll-off Containert NA Special Events NA
Recycling
Note: Sunset Scavenger and Golden Gate Disposal lease the above equipment with an option to buy at the end of a 5-year
depreciation period.
* The cost of purchasing new rear-loading packers is estimated at $100,000 each. These trucks were purchased and have been
depreciated over more than 10 years.
t Roll-off container is used for the collection of recyclable materials at special events.
Page 164
-------
San Francisco, California
San Francisco's Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs (1990)
Recycling Composting Total
Collection* $0 $6,000 $6,000
Processing* 0 83,000 83,000
Administration 434,500 86,500 521,000
Education/Publicity 251,620 38,680 290,300
Total $686,120 $214,180 $900,300
Not* These costs are based on the City's 1990-91 budget
*The City does not incur any costs (or the collection or processing of recyclable materials. In 1990. $6,000 was allocated for the
collection of Christmas trees, and $83,000 was budgeted for funding the backyard composting program.
Materials Revenues: No revenues are retained by the City. Haulers roll their revenues from
the sale of recyclables collected at curbside back into the program to
offset its cost.
Source of Funding: Funding is generated from a $1.12 per household fee charged as part of
the monthly garbage rate; it is paid into a separate Solid Waste Impound
Account (rather than being commingled with general City funds).
Full-time Employees: 5 City employees (1 Recycling Manager; 1 Assistant Coordinator each for
office recycling, education, and special projects; and a Public Information
Coordinator)
Part-time Employees: 3 City employees (2 on the school education program; 1 on special projects)
Future Solid Waste Management Plans
San Francisco's Office of Recycling is planning to finalize the 6th through 12th grade recycling
curriculum and introduce it into schools. The office plans to develop an interactive recycling exhibit
with the San Francisco Academy of Sciences or the San Francisco Exploratorium, and is planning courses
on natural resource conservation, including recycling, at various community colleges.
SFRP is addressing several aspects of composting. With food waste as a target, the City plans to
expand the vermicomposting workshops, introduce the composting of food and yard trimmings into large
apartment complexes, site a public drop-off for compostables, and investigate the feasibility of a
commercial food waste collection program. Additionally, SFRP is considering citywide expansion of
the curbside Christmas tree collection program.
The City is contracting Micro Services Plus to investigate the feasibility of a nonhazardous waste
exchange program. SFRP is providing $30,000 in funding for a feasibility study of a project that would
create a recycled products job training and retail center in the City. Also SFRP is considering a wet/dry
collection system in conjunction with the existing curbside program.
The Program is also compiling a list of organizations that accept home furniture, appliances, and
other reusable items that Goodwill and the Salvation Army do not accept; the list will include
businesses that repair such items. Together with the Bureau of Building Inspection, SFRP plans to
advocate an amendment to the existing City Building Code that would require storage space for
recycling in all new buildings. SFRP is also working with State agencies to develop legislation for the
Page 165
-------
&nt Francisco, California
collection and recycling of batteries. Finally, San Francisco has budgeted $294,000 for anti-scavenging
enforcement in 1991.
Contacts
Amy Perlmutter
Recycling Manager
San Francisco Recycling Program
1145 Market Street #401
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone (415)554-3400
Fax (415)554-3434
Shelly Reider
Recycling Project -nrdinator
San Francisco Recycling Program
1145 Market Street #401
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone (415)554-3400
Fax (415)554-3434
Marcia deVaughn
Solid Waste Planning Manager
City and County of San Francisco Solid Waste
Management Program
1145 Market Street #401
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone (415) 554-3400
Fax (415)554-3434
Carl Grimm
Education Director
San Francisco League of Urban Gardeners
Phone (415)468-0110
Maureen Hart
West Coast Salvage and Recycling Company
1900 17th Street
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone (415)621-3840
Robert Besso
Sunset Scavenger
Tunnel Avenue & Betty Road
San Francisco, CA 94134
Phone (415) 330-1300
Fax (415)330-1372
Kelly Runyon
Sanitary Fill
501 Tunnel Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94134
Phone (415)468-2442
Lisa Bauer
Golden Gate Disposal Company
900 Seventh Street
San Francisco, CA 94107
Phone (415) 626-4000
Fax (415) 553-2905
Endnotes
1 William Schoen, Brown, Vence and Associates, San Francisco, California, personal communication, October to
November 1991.
Page 166
-------
Seattle, Washington
Seattle,
Washington
Demographics
Jurisdiction:
Population:
Area:
Total Households:
Total Businesses:
Brief Description:
City of Seattle
516,259 in 1990
92 square miles
249,032 total households (132,330 single-family households; 113,146
households in multi-unit buildings: 22,641 in buildings of 2 through 4
units, 71,285 in 5- through 49-unit buildings, and 19,220 households in
buildings of 50 units or more; and 3,556 households in mobile homes,
trailers, and other dwellings)
30,000 businesses (estimated by the Gtizens Service Bureau)
Seattle, the largest city in Washington and a noted cultural center of the
Northwest, sits on Puget Sound surrounded by the Cascade and Olympic
Mountains. The annual average unemployment rate of the Seattle
metropolitan statistical area was 3.5 percent in 1990. The latest
available figures suggest that unemployment is rising. Per capita income
in the Seattle primary metropolitan statistical area was $21,137 in 1987.
Page 167
-------
Seattle, Washington
Solid Waste Generation and Recovery
Annual Tonnages (1990)
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
Disposed
Incinerated
Landfilled
Generated
Residential*
115,691
78,911
36,780
140,528
0
140,528
Comm/
Instltt
157,643
154,199
3,444
239,672
0
239,672
Self-Haul*
21,002
8,038
12,964
64,374
0
64,374
Total
MSW
294,336
241,148
53,188
444,574
0
444,574
C&D
1,129
133
996
NA
0
NA
Total
Waste
295,465
241,281
54,184
NA
0
NA
256,219 397,315 85,376 738,910
Percent by Weight Recovered**
NA
NA
Recovered
Recycled
Composted
45%
31%
14%
40%
39%
**
25%
9%
15%
40%
33%
7%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Note: In 1990, 81,192 tons of solid waste were self-hauled to City transfer stations. For a period in 1990, sites designated for ttie
disposal of construction and demolition debris were closed to the public and 16,818 tons of C&D were self-hauled to the transfer
stations. This tonnage has been subtracted from the self-haul waste disposed, yielding 64,374 tons.
* If material rejected during processing (690 tons) were subtracted from material recovered, and instead included as waste
disposed. Seattle's residential recycling rate would be 30.5% instead of 30.8%.
f Commercial/Institutional tonnages recycled are based on the City's extrapolations (using conservative growth estimates) from
1988 actual tonnages collected.
$ Self-haul materials include recyclable materials and municipal solid waste brought to the Seattle Waste Utility's two transfer
stations by residents and businesses. A study conducted in 1990 by Matrix, a Seattle-based consulting firm, showed that 57
percent of self-haul waste is residential and 43 percent is commercial.
§ Numbers may not add to total due to roundhig
** Less than 1 percent
Landfill and Transfer
Station Tipping Fees:
Refuse Collection and
Disposal:
$11.00 per ton in 1986 and $31.50 per ton in 1987 through 1990 at the
landfill; $62.00 per ton at City transfer stations in 1990; $58 per ton at
private transfer stations. Beginning April 1991, MSW was tipped at the
Argo Kailyard for $4150 per ton.
Residential waste in Seattle is collected by private contractors, brought
to one of two City-owned transfer stations, and then long-hauled by truck
to King County's Cedar Hills Landfill, approximately 30 miles from
Seattle. As of April 1991, MSW was directed to the Argo Kailyard for
longhaul to a landfill in Arlington, Oregon. The railyard fee of $41 JO
per ton covers transportation and disposal. Commercial waste is collected
by two private haulers who have franchises enabling them to collect
refuse in Seattle. In 1990 the haulers transported commercial waste to
two privately owned transfer stations in the City. Seattle Disposal,
Bayside Disposal (owned by Waste Management), and two other
companies, Halffman Trucking and Montleon Trucking, haul construction
and demolition debris. The City paid a total of $17,404,000 for refuse
collection and disposal in 1990. Of this, Seattle paid $9,387,000 for the
Page 168
-------
Seattle, Washington
Municipal Solid Waste Recovered and Disposed (Percent by Weight, 1990)
Disposed 60% Recycled 40%
Residential Disposed 19% ^^^^m Kyyy,^ Residential Recycled 11 %
fl
Residential Composted 5%
Comm/lnst Disposed 32%
.• • »" •
Comm/lnst Recycled 21%
Self-Haul Recycled 1%
Self-Haul Composted 2%
Self-Haul Disposed 9%
Refuse Collection and
Disposal (cont'd):
collection of 140,528 tons of residential refuse and $8,017,000 for the
disposal of 221,720 tons of refuse (140,528 from the residential sector and
81,192 tons self-hauled to City transfer stations). Seattle has had a
variable can rate, as opposed to a flat monthly garbage rate, since 1981.
The City offers residents four different-sized containers: a 19-gallon
"mini-can" at $10.70 per month; a 32-gallon can at $13.75 a month; a 60-
gallon can at $22.75 per month; and the largest container, a 90-gallon can,
at $31.75 per month.
Materials Recovery Overview
Goals and Legislative
Requirements:
Seattle has set a goal of recovering 60 percent of its municipal solid waste
stream by 1998: 24 percent through residential curbside and drop-off
collection programs; and 36 percent from the commercial sector. Some
construction and demolition debris is recovered at the transfer stations,
but is not targeted in Seattle's 60 percent recycling goal. The City has
interim goals of 40 percent by 1991 and 50 percent by 1993.
The City began developing recycling plans in 1985, after plans to build a mass burn incinerator were
derailed by citizen protest. In September of 1986, after the closure of two City-operated landfills,
Seattle had to renegotiate its disposal options. The City decided to transport its waste to a County-
operated landfill, where disposal fees were almost three times that at the City-operated landfills. In
1987 the City renewed the incinerator option. Continued citizen objections to the new incinerator plan
Page 169
-------
Seattle, Washington
prompted additional recycling and waste reduction research by the City Solid Waste Utility. This
research yielded an analysis of existing recovery activities in the City and additional recovery
strategies that could be implemented. One of the scenarios predicted that the City could recover 64
percent of its waste stream by the year 2000. A modification of this alternative was adopted as the
official plan to recover 60 percent of the City's solid waste by 1998 and was used to convince the City
Council to abandon plans for incineration and adopt a recycling/landfilling waste management
strategy.
In February of 1988, Seattle began a citywide residential curbside recycling program. The Solid
Waste Utility contracts with two private haulers for the collection and processing of materials
collected at the curb. The collection services are offered to approximately 148,500 single- through 4-
unit residences, with the two collection contractors using different approaches. Recycle America, a
subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc., provides collection services in the north section of the City.
Households there receive three stackable containers for recyclable materials, which are collected
weekly. Recycle Seattle, a subsidiary of Rabanco, Inc. (a locally owned waste management company),
collects materials in the south section of the City. Participants in the south section are provided with
90-gallon containers, and the recyclables are collected monthly. In 1989 the amount of recyclables
collected per [participating household was 18 percent greater on average in the north section than in the
south section; in 1990 it was 15 percent greater.
The City of Seattle is very interested in how the two different service methods perform, but
believes that it is too early to draw any conclusions. The south end is different demographically from
the north end. In general, the north section of the City is a higher-income area than the south section.
The City commissioned Elway Research, Inc. to compare attitudes and recycling behavior of
participants and nonparticipants in areas of low participation in the City, and to assess which factors
contribute to nonparticipation. Three hundred and one households from areas of low participation in
the City were randomly selected and the residents surveyed by telephone. Solid waste, yard waste,
and recyclable materials were collected from a subsample of 149 households. The results of the study,
published in May 1991, suggest that nonparticipants are more likely to live in a 1- or 2-person
household (as opposed to a group house in which more waste is generated), not to have attended
college, and to earn less than $30,000 per year. The study also found that participating households
actually produce more household waste than do similar nonpartitipating households.
A pilot collection program for mixed plastic servicing 4,500 households began in November 1988. As
a result of this pilot program, the City in 1989 implemented curbside collection of PET plastic containers
only, although PET, LDPE, and HDPE plastic containers were accepted at eight City drop-off centers.
In an effort to reduce the amount of plastics generated in Seattle, the City in 1988 banned the use of
polystyrene and plastic beverage containers at all City facilities.
The tonnage of recyclable material collected at curbside from the residential sector increased 12
percent from 1989 to 1990 and 91 percent from 1988 to 1990. The 45,737 tons collected through the
residential curbside program represents over half of the 78,911 tons of recyclables collected in the
residential sector.
Before the establishment of the recycling goals, the City relied on a network of independently
owned for-profit and nonprofit recycling centers that purchased, accepted, or collected household and
commercial recyclable materials.1 In 1985 this network alone recovered a remarkable 22 percent of the
City's waste. This level of recycling is attributed to the City's variable can rate, which has been in
effect since 1981. The Seattle Solid Waste Utility has set up a mitigation committee to analyze the
effect of the curbside program on the independently owned for-profit and nonprofit recycling centers.
Thus far, they have found that the recyders operating drop-off centers and buy-back centers in the City
may have seen their recovery rates go down, but those operating outside the City limits have
experienced an increase in material. A study quantifying these results has not been completed, but one
possible explanation for the increase in materials collected outside of town is the increased education
and advertising for recycling and waste reduction.
Page 170
-------
Seattle, Washington
In 1989 Seattle implemented a titywide curbside yard waste collection program, and required
residents to set out yard waste separate from recyclable material and refuse. From 1988 to 1990, the
City witnessed a decrease in yard waste disposed from more than 17 percent to less than 3 percent
Through its Environmental Allowance Program, the Solid Waste Utility has funded many projects
to test innovative recycling techniques, including mixed waste paper collection from small businesses
and apartment buildings ($99,000, Paper Fibres); a program to test methods for the recycling, reuse, and
safe disposal of latex paint ($21,000, Morley and Associates); Cash for Trash, a monthly garbage
lottery that paid participants for having recyclable-free garbage ($30,000, Metrocenter YMCA); and
the purchase of a shredder-chipper for loan to neighborhood residents for backyard composting ($2,000,
Duwamish Peninsula Community Commission).
The City of Seattle won the Best Overall Program in a Large City award in the Institute for Local
Self-Reliance's Record Setting Recycling Contest 1989. The City has received similar awards from
the National Recycling Coalition and the Washington State Department of Ecology. In May 1991,
Seattle Tilth's Community Composting Education Program won the EPA's first annual
Administrator's Award for Community, Civic, and Nonprofit Recycling Activities.
Recycling Activities
Residential Curbside Recycling
Start-up Date:
Service Provider:
Pick-up Frequency:
Same Day as Refuse:
Households Served:
Mandatory:
Participation Rate:
Materials Collected:
February 1988 for the north section, April 1988 for the south
Private haulers under municipal contract: Recycle America in the north
section and Recycle Seattle in the south section.
Recyclables are picked up weekly in the north section of the City and
monthly in the south section.
No
148,500 households (single-family through four-unit households, based on
Seattle Solid Waste Utility estimates) are eligible for curbside collection
service as of 1990 (69,000 in the north section, and 79,500 in the south
section).
No
83 percent citywide in December 1990 (89.6 percent in the north section,
and 773 percent in the south section). Participation rate is defined as
sign-up rate—the ratio of the number of households registered for the
program to the number of households eligible. As of June 1991,923 percent
of eligible households in the north section and 80.4 percent in the south
end had signed up for curbside collection of recyclables.
Newspaper, mixed waste paper (magazines, junk mail, coupons, fliers,
wrapping paper, used envelopes, cereal boxes, cancelled checks, old bills,
old papers, phone books, paper tubes, paper egg cartons, and brochures),
glass, aluminum, tin, PET plastic containers, and corrugated cardboard
Page 171
-------
Seattle, Washington
Set-out Method: In the north section of the City, residents are furnished with three 12-
gallon stacking containers made by Rehrig Pacific. One holds commingled
glass, aluminum, PET plastic containers, and tin cans. Another holds
mixed scrap paper. The third holds newspaper. Corrugated cardboard is
set out next to the containers. In the south section, 60-gallon or 90-gallon
toters, made by Toter Inc. and Dye Plastics, hold commingled materials
(glass and plastic containers, aluminum and tin cans, newspapers, and
mixed paper).
Collection Method and Compartmentalized recycling trucksjare used for collection of recyclables
Vehicles: in the north section of the City. Five rear-loading trucks are used in the
south section. In both sections of the City, a 1-person crew operates the
recycling vehicle.
Economic Incentives: The variable can rate is an incentive for residents to generate as little
waste as possible and to recycle as much as possible.
Enforcement: Not applicable
Annual Tonnage 45,737 tons in 1990, of which 24,787 were collected from the north end and
20,950 were collected from the south end. (23,984 tons were collected at
curbside in 1988 and 40,732 tons were collected in 1989.)
Under Seattle's contract terms the haulers must pick up and market waste paper. Both companies
instruct customers to recycle all paper products that are not wax- or plastic-coated. Recycle America
has modified its collection method; its recycling vehicles must periodically off-load the waste paper
into packer trucks due to the volume of waste paper collected through the residential curbside program.
Multi-unit Collection
In 1988 the City hired a full-time coordinator to develop and implement an apartment recycling
program. The coordinator has been responsible for informing apartment owners, managers, and dwellers
how to recycle; making the program available throughout the City; and coordinating with the City,
recyclers, and apartment building owners, managers, and tenants. The City started the program in the
fall of 1989, offering recycling services to households in multi-unit buildings.
Initially, the Seattle Solid Waste Utility planned to give haulers an economic incentive for
providing recycling to rnv -unit buildings of five or more units. The haulers were to receive a diversion
credit of $30 to $40 per • or recyclable materials collected. However, only one small hauler, Nuts &
Bolts Recycling, signed 4 for this program. The City then approached the current curbside recycling
contractors about adding apartments to their routes; it also opened negotiations with two other private
contractors. A satisfactory price could not be negotiated, so the City prepared an RFP asking only for
proposals that did not exceed $75 per ton, the approximate avoided disposal cost. Nuts & Bolts, which
originally signed up for the diversion credit program was allowed to utilize it. In 1989 this hauler
reported 305 tons recycled; it has increased this amount to approximately 75 tons per month in 1990.
As of 1991, the City pays a $60 per ton diversion credit to two private recyclers. Nuts & Bolts
Recycling, the larger of the two, collects recyclables from approximately 400 buildings of four units or
more in the north end of the City. West Seattle Recycling collects from 25 to 30 apartment buildings of
four or more units in the south end of the City. Nuts & Bolts collects old newsprint, aluminum and tin
cans, color-separated glass bottles, and mixed wastt paper (all but wax- and poly-coated), and West
Seattle Recycling collects newspapers and aluminum cans. Residents are asked to separate their
recyclables, sort glass by color, and place materials in 55-gallon containers (provided by the hauler),
which are typically located in the building's basement or garage.
Page 172
-------
Seattle, Washington
In addition to paying the diversion credit, the Gty shares the risk of marketing the recyclables.
The City and the contractors negotiated for a base selling price of $40 per ton for newspaper and glass
bottles, $55 per ton for tin cans, $633 per ton for aluminum cans, and $15 per ton for mixed paper. The
contractor takes the loss or the gain if the price deviates up to 20 percent from the base price; for price
deviations greater than 20 percent, the City shares the loss or the profit equally with the contractors.
The City is negotiating with both Recycle America and Recycle Seattle for the provision of citywide
collection of recyclables from apartment complexes.
Sun West Disposal collects recyclable materials from high-density apartment buildings
(approximately 20 to 50 units) independent of the Gty. Sun West has arrangements for the collection of
recyclables with the owners or managers of approximately 400 apartment buildings, independent of
municipal contracts. It supplies 90-gallon toters as needed and collects materials commingled.
Collection crews bring materials to the Rabanco Recycling Center.
Commercial & Institutional Curbside/Alley Recycling
Legislative
Requirements:
Service Provider:
Number Served:
Type Served:
Materials Collected:
Pick-up Frequency:
Collection Vehicles and
Set-out Method:
Incentives:
Annual Tonnage
None
Seattle Disposal (a Rabanco company) and Bayside Disposal (a Waste
Management company), the primary refuse haulers, offer recycling
services to their customers. In addition there are numerous other paper
companies such as Weyerhaeuser International, Pacific Paper Stock,
Independent Paper Stock, and Ideal Paper Stock provide, and recycling
companies, such as Nuts & Bolts Recycling, Sun West/American
Recycling, West Seattle Recycling, and Seadrunar Recycling, also collect
recyclable materials from offices and businesses in Seattle.
Not available
Any business that requests service
Corrugated cardboard, office paper, computer paper,
aluminum and ferrous cans, plastic containers, and glass
On-call basis
magazines,
Haulers collect materials that are set out in 90-gallon toters or in 1-, 2-, or
3-cubic-yard dumpsters
Rates for the collection of source-separated materials are between 25 and
45 percent less than for refuse collection. The City currently excludes
collection of commercial recyclables from the City Business and
Occupation Tax that haulers must pay on garbage collection revenues.
Not available
Private Sector Activities
Four collection companies service the commercial and industrial sector of Seattle with refuse
collection. Each of these haulers holds a certificate from the Washington Utility Transportation
Commission (WUTC), which regulates refuse rates. As of 1991 the WUTC approves commercial
recycling tariffs, special recycling rates submitted by the haulers which determine what rate the
haulers may charge commercial customers. Seattle Disposal and Bayside Disposal, the major
Page 173
-------
Seattle, Washington
commercial waste haulers, collect recyclable materials from many of their commercial customers.
These two companies compete for customers through service, but have identical territories and rates.
They both provide regular route service and drop-box service for on-call customers. Both offer reduced
rates for the collection of source-separated materials—typically a 25 percent price reduction. Paper
companies in the region collect high-grade paper from offices, some also collect other materials such as
corrugated cardboard, used beverage containers, and a number of other private recyders collect
recyclable materials from businesses and pick up material from school- and charity-sponsored paper
drives. Seadrunar Recycling collects used beverage containers, corrugated cardboard, mixed paper, and
magazines from businesses. The revenues from the materials go to fund its drug and narcotic
rehabilitation program. The City does not regulate or fund private sector collection services.
Public Sector Activities
Seattle has had a recycling program in City offices for 10 years. The City has contracted with
Seadrunar Recycling, a nonprofit organization committed to drug rehabilitation of juveniles and adults,
for weekly pick-up of paper and cardboard at municipal offices. Employees typically keep a recycling
box at their work stations. Periodically, they empty the boxes into centralized collection stations,
usually blue 55-gallon drums. On pick-up day, the recycling operator empties the barrels and takes the
paper for baling and marketing.
In 1989 the City signed new contracts for a multimaterial recycling collection program of office
paper, newspaper, aluminum, glass, and cardboard. Collection services were expanded to include
smaller City facilities not previously served. The program includes employee education, promotion,
and additional sign-ups.
The Solid Waste Utility contracted with two local consulting firms in 1990 to conduct waste audits
of 50 commercial establishments in Seattle. From the results of these audits, the City published the
Commercial Waste Audit Manual, to aid businesses in evaluating their current operations, waste
streams, and disposal practices, and to help them develop and implement waste reduction and recycling
programs.
Self-haul and Drop-off Centers
Number and Type: There are hundreds of private dropoff sites and buy-back centers
throughout the City.
Public or Private: There are two public drop-off centers, one at each of the City Solid Waste
Utility transfer stations. The rest are private. Numerous drop-boxes are
sponsored by schools, churches, scout troops, clubs, and other charities.
Sectors Served: Residential and commercial/institutional sectors
Materials Accepted: The Solid Waste Utility accepts newspapers, mixed paper, corrugated
cardboard, glass, aluminum and tin containers, plastic bottles, large
appliances, scrap metal, mattresses, batteries, and motor oil. Other sites
collect newspaper, high-grade paper, glass containers, and aluminum
cans. Most schools, churches, scout troops, and other charities typically
collect only newspaper and/or aluminum cans.
Page 174
-------
Seattle, Washington
Annual Tonnage 8£38 tons of recyclables and 12,964 tons of yard waste in 1990 were
collected at the City's Solid Waste Utility's two transfer stations. This
represents an increase of 82 percent in recyclables and 15 percent in yard
waste over 1988 figures. In addition, an estimated 24 percent of Seattle's
waste stream is recovered by independently owned, for-profit and
nonprofit recycling centers, but exact tonnages are not available.
Salvage/Reuse
The Solid Waste Utility has completed a directory for rental, repair, salvage services, as well as
businesses that sell used goods to promote reuse in the City. Eight thousand directories will be
distributed through retail outlets to businesses and households throughout the City. Salvation Army,
Seattle Goodwill Industries, and other charities take reusable items at drop boxes in the City.
Processing and Marketing of Recyclables
Recyclable materials collected through the City's residential curbside collection program and
private commercial garbage collection services are processed at private facilities: the Rabanco
Recycling Center, the Recycle America Processing Center, and the Eastmont Development Transfer
Station.
The Rabanco Recycling Center was built on the site of a former steel warehouse and began operating
in June 1988. The 80,000-square-foot processing facility is located on 5 acres. The plant is designed to
process 500 to 700 tons per day of recyclables from a variety of waste streams including clean paper,
cardboard, newspaper, and plastic loads; paper-rich loads of commercial waste collected from selected
commercial garbage routes; and commingled recyclables from Recycle Seattle's residential curbside
collection program in the south end of the City and from certain commercial accounts. It is estimated
that start-up costs for the plant were between $6 and $8 million dollars. Sixteen full-time employees
work at the processing center. The facility uses a combination of conveyors, trommel, disc screens,
magnetic separation, air classification, hand picking, and baling to recover and process recyclable
materials. Approximately 65 to 70 percent of the recovered material is paper, and 30 to 35 percent
commingled bottles and cans. Glass and metal are marketed locally. Color-sorted glass is sold to Fibres
International, a Seattle glass beneficiation plant. MRI, a local company, removes the tin from bimetal
cans and sells the remaining steel to plants in the Puget Sound area. Aluminum is sold to regional
plants. PET is sold domestically. An average 2.7 percent by weight of the materials collected at
curbside from the south end of the City was reported rejected as nonrecyclable in 1990. Rabanco also has
a high-grade processing facility where high-grade paper from office building collection is processed.
Much of this high-grade paper is sold through Rabanco's subsidiary, Ideal Paper Stock, to markets in
the Pacific Rim.
The Recycle America Processing Center was opened by Waste Management in the fall of 1988 to
process recyclables collected by Recycle America from the north end of Seattle. Initial equipment costs
for the 43,000-square-foot facility (of which the processing area comprises 37,000 square feet) were an
estimated $500,000, and annual operating and maintenance costs were approximately $858,000 in 1989.
The center, designed to handle approximately 350 tons per day, is currently processing approximately
110 tons per day, and employs 24 people full-time and 1 person half-time (5 on the paper sort floor and 7
on the bottle and can sort line). Over 65 percent of the material processed at the facility is paper,
including newspaper, cardboard, and mixed paper. Glass, ferrous, aluminum, and PET containers from
the curbside program are also processed there. Since recyclables are partially separated by the
generators and are collected in compartmentalized trucks, the facility is primarily used for baling and
sorting commingled bottles and cans. Glass, tin, and aluminum are sorted on a pick line through a
Page 175
-------
Seattle, Washington
combination of magnets and hand sorting. Most of the glass is sold locally to Fibres International and
most of the ferrous containers to MRI. Waste paper is-bated and brokered to markets in South Korea and
Taiwan that use the paper as filler stock for other paper grades. PET is sold domestically. The
facility is also designed to process commercial loads of source-separated cardboard and mixed waste
paper. About 0.5 percent by weight of the materials collected at curbside was reported rejected as
contaminants in 1990. Two new lines, were added to the facility in September 1991. One replaced the
former bottle and can line, and the other is a corrugated cardboard and mixed waste paper sort line.
The Eastmont Development Transfer Station is owned and operated by Waste Management.
Commercial waste collected by Bayside Disposal is dumped at this transfer station. The facility uses a
conveyor belt to spread out dry commercial loads. Workers hand-pick cardboard and aluminum.
Market Development Initiatives/Procurement
On August 11,1987, the Mayor of Seattle directed all departments of the City to print letterhead on
100 percent ?-?cycled paper. Seattle municipal offices procure envelopes and copier paper made from
recycled paper fiber. The City requires haulers to identify markets for the recyclable materials they
collect. The Solid Waste Utility has entered into market risk-sharing agreements with the contracted
haulers for the materials collected through the apartment building recycling program.
Through the Business and Industry Recycling Venture, Seattle and King County are urging businesses
to procure materials with recycled content. This program, which began in September 1990, is a
cooperative effort between the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce, the Solid Waste Utility, and
King County's Commission for Marketing Recyclable Materials. Two recycling information specialists,
one from the City and one from the County, provide information to businesses on recycling services and
vendors of recycled products.
The Washington Committee for Recycling Markets, a consortium of representatives from the
private and public sector, established by the State legislature, hired Matrix, a Seattle-based
consulting firm, to assess market conditions from mixed waste paper. The firm's study indicated that
the four mills in the state currently using a total of 16,000 to 23,000 tons per year of mixed waste paper
(to make fruit tray pads, gypsum wallboard backing, roofing felt, construction paper, and corrugated
cardboard) are not planning to increase their consumption. Matrix recommended that the State (i)
provide a number of incentives, including subsidies and diversion credits, to offset the cost of processing
mixed waste paper; (ii) provide access to capital and/or a consumption tax credit for processing and
manufacturing facilities that use mixed waste paper; and (iii) evaluate the feasibility of establishing
a mixed waste paper pulp factory. In 1990 the State passed legislation to create a permanent market
development center known as the dean Washington Center with an annual budget of $2 million.
The City of Seattle added PET plastics to curbside recycling in the fall of 1989, with the National
Association of Plastic Container Recovery (NAPCOR) guaranteeing markets. Recycled Plastics
Markets (RPM) in Bellevue, Washington is manufacturing Seattle's compost bins from plastic milk jugs
collected at drop-off sites throughout the City. Approximately 66 to 79 jugs are used to make each bin.
Composting Activities
Since 1980 the City of Seattle has undertaken numerous demonstration projects and experiments
with composting. These provided data and experience that helped tbu City in planning its
comprehensive compostir.r program, which began in 1989. Initial composing projects included
composting demonstratior •• - at 12 Pea Patch gardens, a community composting education program, a
Zoo Doo program, Christn* tree chipping, and a 3-month pilot "Clean Green" program in 1987 at the
City's two transfer stations. In October 1988, Seattle passed an ordinance requiring residents to separate
Page 176
-------
Seattle, Washington
yard waste from other recydables and refuse. To handle this yard waste, the City has a three-pronged
strategy: expanding the transfer station "dean Green" collection program, encouraging backyard
composting, and collecting yard waste at curbside.
In 1986 the Qty began collecting pen waste and pen straw from the Woodland Park Zoo, in
cooperation with the Parks Department. This material is composted and sold to the public under the
name of "Zoo Doo." The Parks Department budgets and manages the program, which generates enough
revenue to cover its own costs, as well as avoiding disposal costs for pen wastes.
Clean Green Program
The two transfer stations accept dean yard waste (grass dippings, leaves and brush, trees and
branches up to 12 inches in diameter) at a discounted fee to customers, through the "Clean Green"
program. The Qty began this program on a 3-month pilot basis in 1987. In 1988 it expanded service to
all City residents and businesses during designated daily hours. Residents and businesses may self-haul
yard waste to either of the two transfer stations. Cars are charged $4.00 per trip as compared to $5.00
for mixed refuse; trucks are charged $48.00 per ton, instead of $66.00 per ton for refuse. The yard waste
is dumped into two direct-dump trailers placed in slots below floor level. Transfer station employees
direct yard waste customers to the "dean Green" area, assist in unloading, and watch to ensure that no
contaminants are dumped with the yard waste. In 1989,11,248 tons were collected at the drop-off sites
and transferred to Cedar Grove, a private composting facility, for processing; in 1990,12,964 tons were
collected and processed through the program. The City incurs a cost of $12 per ton for transporting
materials to Cedar Grove (roughly 40 miles round trip), and $16 per ton for processing the material.
Backyard Composting
Since 1986 the City has sponsored four composting demonstration sites throughout Seattle. Three of
the sites are in urban gardens, and one is next to an urban market. The City also funds a backyard
composting education program run by Seattle Tilth, a local organization of urban gardeners. The
program trains volunteers to be proficient at composting. These volunteers, or master composters,
perform 40 hours of outreach for neighborhood and business groups, and at schools and street fairs. In
addition, they give presentations and tours at the City's demonstration sites. In 1988 with a program
budget of $27,500, master composters responded to over 2,000 calls on the compost hotline and made over
20,000 contacts with citizens.
The Solid Waste Utility allotted $483,000 in 1989 for the backyard composting program, with 75
percent of the cost covered by a $362,500 Department of Ecology grant. The City has hired a consultant
to coordinate the distribution of free composting bins, half of which are targeted for specific
neighborhoods, and has trained seven master composters to assist residents in setting up and
maintaining the bins. Each participant will receive in-home instruction on composting techniques. Bin
distribution began in December 1989. By the end of 1990,10,840 bins had been distributed to single-
family households.
Curbside Collection
Start-up Date: January 1,1989
Service Provider: General Disposal, a local independent company, collects yard waste in
the north section, and U.S. Disposal, a subsidiary of Rabanco, collects in
the south section, both under contract with the City.
Page 177
-------
Seattle, Washington
Households Served:
Mandatory:
Materials Collected:
Set-out Method:
Collection Vehicles &
Method:
Same Day as Refuse:
Collection Frequency:
Economic Incentives:
Enforcement:
Annual Tonnage
94^05 are participating in the curbside yard waste collection program;
other households may self-haul then- yard waste to the transfer stations.
Yes. As of 1989, residents are required to separate yard waste from refuse.
Leaves, grass dippings, brush, and trees and branches up to 4 inches in
diameter
Yard waste may be placed in cans, bagged, or bundled with string.
A 1-person crew collects yard waste using rear-loading packer trucks.
Yes
Weekly, year-round in the north section of the City; biweekly from
March through October, and monthly for the rest of the year in the south
section of the City
For a fee of $2 per month, haulers contracting with the City will collect
as many as 20 bags, cans, or bundles of yard waste.
Private haulers will not pick up refuse that contains yard waste. (In such
cases, they leave a note explaining why the refuse was not collected.)
The program seems to be successful; a recent waste stream composition
study indicated that only 1 percent of residential waste disposed in
Seattle consists of yard waste, as compared with 17.1 percent in 1988.
36,781 tons in 1990 (25,936 collected from the north end and 10,845 tons
collected from the south end)
Composting Site
The Cedar Groves Compost Facility, located 30 miles southeast of Seattle, is owned and operated
by Rabanco. The 26-acre compost site is designed to process up to 60,000 tons annually. In 1990,49,745
tons of yard waste were composted at the facility. Of these, 36,781 tons came in through the residential
curbside program and 12,964 tons from self-haul. US. Disposal, a subsidiary of Rabanco, hauls yard
waste collected at the curb in the south section of the City directly to the Cedar Groves facility.
General Disposal hauls yard waste from the north section of the City to one of the Utility's transfer
stations, and the City then hauls this yard waste, along with yard waste collected through the self-
haul program, to the compost facility. A laborer empties bags of yard waste and pulls out
contaminants. These contaminants account for less than 1 percent by weight of the total incoming
material. The material is shredded in a tub grinder and then composted in piles. The Rabanco
Company, in conjunction with the Seattle Solid Waste Utility, is producing several different mixes of
compost. Compost is sold for $6 per cubic yard to topsoil wholesalers. Retailers and wholesale outlets
sell the compost in 1-cubic-foot bags for approximately $3.00 per bag.
Seattle pays General Disposal $56.36 per ton for collecting yard waste from the north end and
delivering it to the City's south transfer station. The Cedar Grove facility charges the City a tipping
fee of $5.47 per ton for the first 24,000 tons and $18 per ton for any tonnage above that This fee covers
the cost of processing the yard waste. The City pays U.S. Disposal $84.29 per ton for collection,
hauling, and processing of materials that it collects in the south end of the City.
Page 178
-------
Seattle, Washington
Amount and Breakdown of Materials Recovered
Material
Newspaper
Corrugated Cardboard
Other Paper*
Glass
PETPIastlct
HOPE Plastic
LDPE Plastic
Other Plastic
Aluminum
Ferrous Metals*
Motor Oil
Appliances
Mattresses
Subtotal Recycled
Yard Waste
Subtotal Composted
Total Recovered
Residential
(Tons, 1989)
41,597
—
20,477
13,450
93
20
—
—
1,675
1,689
—
184
—
79,185
31,656
31,656
110,841
Commercial/
Institutional
(Tons, 1988)
4,900
51,345
48,400
2,595
7
97
97
92
101
—
9,600
90
—
117,324
0
0
117,324
Self-Haul
(Tons, 1989)
73
227
166
66
122
—
—
—
3,581
—
136
—
34
4,405
11,248
11,248
15,653
Total
(Tons, 1989)
46,570
51,572
69,043
16,111
222
117
97
92
5,357
1,689
9,736
274
34
200,914
42,904
42,904
243,818
* Residential tonnages include corrugated cardboard, high-grade paper, and mixed paper.
t Self-haul tonnages include PET. HOPE, and other plastics.
$ Self-nan tonnages include ferrous metals.
Residential recyclables collected at curbside increased from 40,732 tons in 1989 to 45,737 in 1990.
Residential yard waste collected at curbside increased from 31,656 tons in 1989 to 40,666 tons in 1990.
Material self-hauled to public and private drop-off centers increased dramatically from 1988 to 1990
(figures are not available for 1989). City-owned drop-off centers accepted 4,405 tons of recyclables in
1988 as compared to 8,038 tons in 1990; they took in 11,248 tons of yard waste in 1989 and 12,964 tons in
1990. Materials collected through private commercial recycling activities came to 117,324 tons in 1988
and 154^55 tons in 1990. These breakdowns are detailed in the preceding and following tables.
Page 179
-------
•Seattle, Washington
Material
Newspaper
Corrugated Cardboard
High-grade Paper
Mixed Scrap Paper
Other Paper
Glass
PET Plastic
HOPE Plastic
Other Plastic
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous Cans
Other Post-consumer Aluminum
Other Post-consumer Ferrous
Nonferrous
Other (misc.)*
Subtotal MSW Recycled
YardWaste§
Subtotal MSW Composted
Total MSW Recovered
Concrete
Wood Waste
Total C&D Recycled
Total C&D Composted
Total C&D Recovered
Total Materials Recycled
Total Materials Composted
Total Materials Recovered
Residential
(Tons, 1990)
40,102
7,874
4
13,218
346
12,905
748
161
—
1,589
1,565
20
149
3
227
78,911
36,780
36,780
115,691
8
16
8
16
24
78,919
36,796
115,715
Commercial/
Institutional
(Tons, 1990)*
11,123
62.571
57,496
4,866
498
4,093
7
96
187
303
296
221
341
27
12,074
154,199
3,444
3,444
157,643
45
36
45
36
81
154,244
3,480
157,724
Self-haul
(Tons, 1990)
182
511
4
650
7
169
243
t
—
2
1
1
5,855
43
370
8,038
12,964
12,964
21,002
80
944
80
944
1,024
8,118
13,908
22,026
Total
(Tons, 1990)
51,407
70,956
57,504
18,734
851
17,167
998
257
187
1,894
1,862
242
6,345
73
12.671
241,148
53,188
53,188
294,336
133
996
133
996
1,129
241,281
54,184
295,465
Note: Tonnages provided above represent materials collected, including any materials that may have been rejected as
contaminants. If rejects are subtracted from residential tonnages, the City recycled 78,221 tons of residential material, rather than
the 78,911 tons listed above. This was calculated in the following manner: 24,787 tons collected in the north X 0.5% reject rate +
20,949.5 tons collected in the south X 2.7 reject rate = 690 tons rejected.
'Commercial/institutional tonnages recycled are based on City extrapolations (using conservative growth estimates) from actual
1988 tonnages collected.
t Lass than 1 ton
$ Other (miscellaneous) includes food waste, textiles, vehicle batteries, and used oil.
§ Yard waste includes grass dippings, leaves, and brush.
Page 180
-------
Seattle, Washington
Curbside Recycling Program By Section
Material
Newspaper
Mixed Paper
Glass
Aluminum
Tin
PET
Total
% Recyclables Recovered
Avg. No. Households Served*
Avg. Pounds per HH per Year
Avg. Pounds per HH per Day
North Section
(Tons, 1989)
7,524.8
9,118.7
5,296.5
320.1
678.0
13.3
22,951.4
56%
55,339
829.5
2.27
South Section
(Tons, 1989)
7,590.8
6,030.9
3,374.9
113.1
601.9
75.6
17,787.2
44%
50,223
708.3
1.94
Total
(Tons, 1989)
15,115.6
15,149.6
8,671.4
433.2
1 ,279.9
88.9
40,738.6
100%
105,562
771.8
2.11
* Seattle records the number of households signed up for the curbside program on a monthly basis. The average number of
households served is the average of these numbers over 12 months of the year.
Material
Newspaper
Mixed Paper
Glass
Aluminum
Tin
PET
Total
% Recyclables Recovered
Avg No. Households Served*
Avg Pounds per HH per Year
Avg Pounds per HH per Day
North Section
(Tons, 1990)
9,057.2
9,687.8
4,874.2
358.5
745.3
64.0
24,787.0
54%
60,256
822.7
2.25
South Section
(Tons, 1990)
8,315.8
7,514.0
4,222.7
236.6
561.4
99.0
20,949.5
46%
61,290
683.6
1.87
Total
(Tons, 1990)
17,373.0
17,201.8
9,096.9
595.1
1,306.7
163.0
45,736.5
100%
121,546
752.6
2.06
* Seattle records the number of households signed up for the curbside program on a monthly basis. The average number of
households served is the average of these numbers over 12 months of the year.
Between 1989 and 1990, tonnages of recydables collected through the residential program increased
by 12 percent overall (8 percent in the north section of the City and 18 percent in the south section of the
City). Paralleling this increase was an even greater increase in the sign-up rate (15 percent overall).
From January through December 1989, an average of 105,562 households (71 percent of eligible
households) had signed up for residential recydables collection. Over 1990, an average of 121,546
households—82 percent of those eligible—signed up for the curbside program. The south end of the
City experienced a 22 percent increase in sign-ups; the north end experienced a 9 percent increase.
Page 181
-------
Seattle, Washington
Soured Reduction Initiatives
Among Seattle's efforts to reduce waste at the source are volume-based refuse rates and an extensive
program. In addition, the Utility's public education campaign includes brochures entitled Cutting
Down on Garbage, Precycling, and Other Ideas for Reducing Waste.
The City has had a variable can rate, as opposed to a flat monthly garbage rate, since 1980. It
offers four different-sized containers: a 19-gallon "mini-can" at $10.70 per month; a 32-gallon can at
$13.75 a month; a 60-gallon can at $22.75 per month; and the largest container, a 90-gallon can, at
$31.75 per month. An analysis, Volume-Based Rates in Solid Waste: Seattle's Experience, showed that
more garbage would have been generated and disposed if the City had not imposed a variable rate
structure. In 1986 and 1987, the City increased rates. This led to significantly more customers
subscribing to fewer or smaller cans. The new curbside recycling, which became available early in 1988,
further influenced the downward shift in subscriptions. In fact, the weighted average number of cans
subscribed by single-family customers decreased from 35 to 1.4 per customer between 1981 and 1988.
Publicity and Education
The implementation of Seattle's comprehensive materials recovery program has required an
aggressive promotional campaign. Two mailings were sent out citywide when the new residential
recycling program first began. Customers were asked to sign up to receive recycling services, and were
then provided with recycling containers. The City, which manages the promotion of the program, has
made a constant effort to advertise. Booths are staffed at street fairs and festivals, and signs are
placed on city buses. The City Utility regularly produces media events.
The Utility continually places articles in the newspapers, has an automated phone service with
over 100 recorded messages regarding recycling, and circulates an information packet on recycling. The
packet stresses selective shopping to avoid plastics and disposable materials, composting of yard waste
and food waste, and donation and resale of household items. The City occasionally inserts selective
shopping tips in garbage bills. The two contractors that collect recyclables at curbside, Recycle
America and Recycle Seattle, work with the Utility to promote the curbside recycling program. The
City Utility conducted a massive media campaign when it first implemented the variable can rate.
In the 1989-90 school year, the City conducted a $105,000 pilot education and recycling program for
ten elementary schools. The Utility offers technical assistance and financial support, including cash
awards, to selected schools for recycling and composting of materials generated at the school. It also
retains a consultant who will provide schools with posters, classroom educational materials, and
assistance.
Page 182
-------
Seattle, Washington
Economics
Costs Coven In 1990 the City of Seattle recovered 295,465 tons of materials (294,336 tons of
municipal solid waste and 1,129 tons of construction and demolition debris). Of
the 294^36 tons of municipal solid waste recovered, 103,520 tons were collected
through municipally sponsored programs: 53,775 tons of residential recyclable
materials and 49,743 tons of residential organic waste. These 103,520 tons were
collected by private companies under contract with the City (45,737 tons of
recyclable material and 36,781 tons of organic waste at curbside), and at the two
City-owned transfer stations (8,038 tons of recydables and 12,964 tons of
compostable materials).
The City does not incur any capital costs for the collection or processing of
recyclable materials recovered through the curbside program, since these
activities are contracted out to the private sector, but pays per ton contract fees to
the two haulers, Recycle America and Recycle Seattle; these are listed under
operating and maintenance costs. In addition, the City paid to transport 8,038
tons of material from the transfer station to end markets.
Capital costs for yard waste collection and processing are incurred by the private
sector, and are not available. The City contracted with General Disposal for the
collection of 25,936 tons of yard waste at curbside in the north end of the City, and
with U.S. Disposal for the collection and processing of 10,845 tons of yard waste
at curbside in the south end of the City. In addition, the City paid Rabanco a
processing fee for the 25,936 tons of yard waste collected at curbside by General
Disposal, and for the 12,964 tons of yard waste self-hauled to the transfer station.
Operating and maintenance costs incurred by the City include contract fees for the
collection and processing of recyclable materials and yard waste collected at
curbside; City labor costs for the collection and transportation of material self-
hauled to the transfer stations; and administrative and education and publicity
costs.
The City pays Recycle America, which handles collection services in the north section of the City,
$5154 per ton with a minimum payment of $2.8 million over a 5-year contract. Recycle America absorbs
total market risk. Recycle Seattle is paid $57.44 per ton; its contract includes an agreement with the
City to share market risks. In 1989 the City paid Recycle America $48.15 per ton and Recycle Seattle
$47.75 per ton. Each year of the contract period, the price paid per ton is adjusted at 80 percent of the
change in the Consumer Price Index.
Page 183
-------
Seattle, Washington
Annual and Per Ton Operating and Maintenance Costs (1990)
Recycling Subtotal
Collection and Processing
Curbside
Contract Fees for Recycle America
Contract Fees for Recycle Seattle
Transfer Station
Administration
Education/Publicity
Composting Subtotal
Collection and Processing
Curbside Collection
Contract with U.S. Disposal*
Contract with General Disposal
Transfer Station Collection and Transport
Transfer Station Processing
Processing at Cedar Grovet
Administration
Education/Publicity
Recycling & Composting Total
Collection and Processing
Administration
Education/Publicity*
Cost
$3,037,652
$2,537,652
2.481,386
1,278,018
1,203,368
56,266
300,000
200,000
$3,636,022
$3,036,022
.Tons Covered Per Ton Cost
53,775
53,775
45,737
24,787
20,950
8,038
53,775
53,775
49,745
49,745
2,375,878
914,125
1,461,753
155,568
202,560
302,016
300,000
300,000
$6,673,674
$5,573,674
600,000
500.000
36,781
10,845
25,936
12,964
12,964
25,936
49,745
49,745
103,520
103,520
103,520
103,520
$56
$47
54
52
57
7
6
4
$73
$61
65
84
56
12
16
12
6
6
$64
$54
6
5
Note: Contracts with Recycle America (Waste Management) and Recycle Seattle (Rabanco) for the collection of recyclable
materials expire in December 1992. In 1993 Recycle America will receive $78 per ton and Rabanco will receive $84 per ton.
*The contract fee paid to General Disposal does not include processing costs.
tCedar Grove processing cost for the processing of material collected by General Disposal and is calculated based on a tipping fee
of $5.47 for 13.155 tons (the first 24,000 tons cost the City $5.47 per ton, of which 10,845 tons are included in U.S. Disposal's
contract) and $18.00 per ton for the remaining 12,781 tons collected by General Disposal.
* The total cost for education and publicity includes both in-house and contracted services. This was estimated by the Public
Education Coordinator as approximately $3 per household eligible for curbside collection. An estimated 40 percent is dedicated to
recycling and 60 percent to composting.
Page 184
-------
Seattle, Washington
Materials Revenues: Approximately $50,000 in 1989, and $45,000 in 1990, from the sale of
transfer station recyclables. Other revenues are retained by the private
haulers.
Source of Funding: Residential garbage rates, which account for 75 percent of the Utility's
revenues are the sole source of revenue for the recycling program.
Full-time Employees: 19 employed in recycling and composting at the Seattle Solid Waste
Utility
Future Solid Waste Management Plans
The Seattle City Council decided in October 1988 to terminate its disposal contract with the King
County Cedar Hills Landfill as of 1992, and to contract for disposal at a landfill east of the Cascade
Mountains by 1993. The Council took this step because it believes that landfills in that arid, sparsely
populated region present fewer environmental hazards than landfills in the Fuget Sound region.
The City is planning to study collection of commercial food waste for composting at an in-vessel
compost facility in 1991. In 1991-92, Seattle and King County are jointly pursuing an $800,000 project to
explore the technical and economic feasibility of residential and commercial/institutional food waste
composting. If an economically feasible collection system can be devised, the City will collect
residential food waste.
In addition, Seattle plans to lobby for Federal and State legislation aimed at reducing the amount
and toxicity of waste being generated. The City will consider adopting waste reduction legislation
itself if neither Federal nor State waste reduction legislation is passed by July 1993. The City will also
work with local retailers to promote the use of products that are durable, reusable, recyclable, or made
of recycled materials.
Contacts
Jennifer Bagby Marilyn Skerbeck
Solid Waste Utility Recycling Specialist
710 Second Avenue #505 Recycle America
Seattle, WA 98104 79011st Avenue South
Phone (206) 684-7808 Seattle, WA 98108
Fax (206) 684-8529 Phone (206) 763-2437
Page 185
-------
Seattle, Washington
Raymond Hoffman Steve Spence
Senior Recycling Planner General Manager
Solid Waste Utility Rabanco Recycling
710 Second Avenue, #505 P.G Box 24745
Seattle, WA 98104 Seattle, WA 98124
Phone (206) 684-7655 Phone (206) 382-1775
Fax (206) 684-8529
Jimjenson
Seattle Tilth (Master Composter Program)
4649 Sunnyside Avenue North
Seattle, WA 98103
Phone (206) 633-0224
References
Corcoran Consulting Group. Recyclable Materials Market Development Summit Meeting, Summary
Report. Seattle, Washington, July 1989.
Skumatz, Lisa. Volume-Based Rates in Solid Waste: Seattle's Experience. Seattle Solid Waste
Utility, Seattle, Washington, February 1989.
City of Seattle Solid Waste Utility. Final Environmental Impact Statement: Waste Reduction,
Recycling, and Disposal Alternatives. Seattle, Washington, July 1988.
City of Seattle Solid Waste Utility. On The Road To Recovery: Seattle's Integrated Solid Waste
Management Plan, Seattle, Washington, August 1989.
City of Seattle Solid Waste Utility. Participation Study for the Curbside/Alley Residential
Recycling Program. Seattle, Washington, May 1991.
City of Seattle Solid Waste Utility. Waste Stream Composition Study, final Report. Seattle,
Washington, May 1991.
Endnotes
of the two private recyclers that formerly operated small curbside collection routes was bought out by the
two main contractors that now operate the residential curbside program.
Page 186
-------
'"Sfflf
coik
Index
Aluminum, 19,20,37,38,39,57,71,89,109,130,
145,162,179,180,181. See also
Commercial materials recovery,
materials targeted; Drop-off centers,
materials targeted; and Residential
materials recovery; materials targeted
Animal bedding, 17,55
Asphalt, 32,33,37,38,54,57,65,89,105,106,
109,137,142,159,162
Backyard composting, 17,23,35,107,126,144,
154,155,161,177
Bans, 29,49,55,61,66,80,86,90,99,121
Batteries, 19,49, 66,69,70,71,83,84,89,105,
141,145,148,158,166,174,180
Beverage container deposit systems, 28,29,34,
37,40,120,129,130
Block corner, 102
Block leader, 20
Bottle bills, see Beverage container deposit
systems
Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI), 11,14,16,27,
64,65,67,68,70,113,141,144
Burning of waste, see Incineration
Buy-back facilities, 15,28-29, 32,43, 53,54,69,
100,105,110,154,158-159,160,174
Campus recycling, 12,142
Capital costs, 21,28,40-43,54,58-59,70, 72-74,
85,91-92,111-112,125,128,131,132,
142,146-147,164,183
Christmas trees, 18,19,35,55-56,57,58,60,61,
86-87,88,89,91,107,108,109, 111, 127,
162,165,176
Collection,
co-collection, 51,113
commingled, 13,15,51-52,67,81-82,84,101,
104,139,140,155-156,157,172,173
containers, see Recycling containers
contract, 28-29,40,50,51,52,56,60,80,87,
93,94,101,136,138,139,140,144,
146,155,170,171-172,173-174,177-
178,183,184
costs, 21-22,40-42,58-60,72-74,91-93,111-
112,146-147,164-165,183-184
nonprofit, 12,14-15,28-30,32,49,55,80,81,
156,170,174
private/15,16,31,50,67,68,69,83,89,103,
^104,121,122,123,126,140,141-142,
170,172,173-174
public, 53,67,68,89,101, 111, 142
refuse, 10-11,23,26-27,48,60,64-65,78-79,
94,98,118-119,121,136-138,15*
'153,154,168-169. See also Volume-
based refuse rates
segregated, 29-30,51,104,122
vehicles, 13,18,30,35,51,60,67,82,87,94,
101,103,104,107,110, 111, 112,122,
123,127,133,139,141,156,172,178,
183
Commercial materials recovery, 14-15, 31-32,
52-53, 68-69,83-84,103-105,123-124,
140-142,156-158,173-174
economic incentives, 31,83,141,157,173
mandatory programs, 83,101,104,123,140
materials targeted, 14,31, 52,68,83,104,
123,141,157,173
recovery levels/3,10,26,48,64,98,118,136,
152,168
Commercial waste,
amount generated, 10,26,48,64,98,118,136,
152,168
definition, 4
Commingling of recyclables, 13,15,51-52,67,
81-82,84,85,101,104,105,106,139,140,
142-143,156,157,172,173,175
Composting, 17-19,35-36,55-56,70-71,86-88,
107-108,126-129,144,161-162,176-178
backyard, see Backyard composting
co-composting, 17,108,177
costs, 42,60,93,112,165,184
curbside collection, 18,35,55-56,59,70,86-
87,91,100,107-108,126-127,177-178
drop-off operations, 12,18,126,127,165,177
food waste, 15,35,127,165,182,185
"master", 17,23,107,126,161,177
mixed waste, 128-129
site, 18,36,56,88,108,127,178
Concrete, 32,33,37,38,54,57,105,106,137,142,
159,162,180
Construction and demolition debris,
definition, 4
disposal, 26,48,64,65,78,98,118,119,136,
152-153,168
Page 187
-------
Index
recovery 0,26,32,33,37,38,48,54,57,98,
106,137,152,159,162,168,180. See
also Asphalt and Concrete
Containers, see Recycling containers
Corrugated cardboard, 13,14,15,17,19,29,31,
32,37,53,54,57,66,68,69,70,71,75,80,
83,84,85,89,91,93,104,105,106,109,
122,123,124,125,130,141,142,145,155,
156,162,171,173,174,176,179,180
Costs for materials recovery programs,
capital costs, 21,28,40-42,43,54,58-59,70,
72-74,85,91-92,111-112,125,128,
131,132,142,146-147,164,183
collection costs, 21,22,41,42,59,73,92,93,
111, 112,146,147,164,165,183
operating and maintenance costs, 22,33,42,
59,60,74,85,91,93,101, 111, 112,
132,147,164,165,175,183,184
processing costs, 21,22,41,42,59,60,70,72,
73,74,91,92,93,112,132,143,146,
147,175,183,184
Data gathering and methodology, 4-8
Disposal costs, 11,27,48,65,118,136,153,168-
169
Drop-off centers, 11,12,14,15-16,17,23,28,32,
39,43,49,50,53,54,66,68,69,72,75,84,
105,120,121,124,125,129,142,154,158,
159,170,174 see also Composting, drop-
off operations
materials targeted, 16,32,53, 69,84,105,
124,142,158,174
Eager Beaver vehicles, 13,82,91,101,102
Economic incentives,
commercial sector, 31,53,83,123,141,157,
173
residential sector, 13,30,35,122,156,172
tipping fees, 18,66,69,70,143,144,161
volume-based refuse rates, 27,30,35,118,
132,156,157,169,172
Education and publicity, 20,40,58,72,90,110,
131,146,163,182
Employment, 22,43,61,75,94,113,124,133,147,
165,175,185
Enforcement, 13,30,82,83,94,102,122,123,139,
141,156,166,178
Farmers, 101,103, 111, 142
Ferrous cans, 12,13,14,16,17,19,20,37,38,39,
49,51,53,57,66,67,69,70,71,89,99,
100,101,104,109,130,143,145,173,180
Food waste, 83,84,89,101,103,104,109, 111,
112,121,127,130,132,141,142,145,161,
162,165,182,185
Funding sources, 22,43,61,75,94,113,131,133,
147,165,185
Future waste management plans, 23,43,61,75,
94,113,133,147,165,185
Glass, 19,20,37,38,39,57,71,89,109,130,145,
162,179,180,180,181. See also
Commercial materials recovery,
materials targeted; Drop-off centers,
materials targeted; and Residential
materials recovery; materials targeted
Grass dippings, 17,18,19,35,49,50,56,57,60,
70,86,87,88,89,120,126,127,148,177,
178
High grade paper, 19,37,38,57,71,89,109,130,
162,180. See also Commercial
materials recovery, materials targeted;
Drop-off centers, materials targeted;
and Residential materials recovery;
materials targeted
Hospital recycling, 103,104,105,110,157
Hotlines, 20,35,40,158,161,177
Household hazardous waste, 12,50,75,124,
129,158,159,162,163,164
Incineration, 12,28,64,65,66,75,78,80,121,
128,137,138,154,169
Institutional recycling, 10,26,31,40,52,57,64,
71,83,98,103-104,110,118,123,136,
141,145,152,157,162,179,180. See also
Hospital recycling and Campus
recycling
Intermediate processing, see Processing
definition, 4
Kann vehicles, 13, 21
Labrie vehicles, 139
Landfills, 10,11,12,27,28,39,48,50,64-65,66,
70,75,78,80,98,106,118,119,121,125,
128,136,152,161,168-169,185
Landscaper's yard waste, 18,19,35,36,37,55,
60,70,108,128,129,131
Leaves, 17-18,19,35-36,37,56,57,70,86-87,88,
107-108,109,126-127,130,176-178,180
Legislation,
against landfilling leaves, 49,55,61,86, 99
beverage container deposit, 28,120,154
commercial, 14,31,52,68,83,104,123,138,
140,156,173
-------
Index
local, 28,31,49,66,79,83,99,120
residential, 79,99,120,138
state, 28,66,82,104,120,123,138,140,154
Lodal vehicles, 13,30,67,101,102,156
Mandatory programs, 81,87,101,107,122,139,
178. See also Enforcement
definition, 4
Market development, 17,18,34,55,86,101,106,
125-126,144,160,176
Marketing, see also Processing,
of recydables, 12,16-17,34,54-55,60,66,68,
69,70,75,85-86,100,105,123,124-
125,129,131,140,142-143,159-160,
172,173,175-176
of yard waste, 18,36,56,70,88,100,128,178
Materials recovered, 19,37,38,57,71,89,109,
130,145,162,179
Mixed paper, 16,17,30,31,32,34,43,55,69,71,
83,84,86,103,104,106,113,123,125,
130,156,157,160,171,172,173,174,175,
179,180,181
Motor oil, 12,23,49,53,57,66,69,70,71,83,84,
89,105,109,120,122,124,125,145,148,
158,160,174,179
Mulch, 17,18,35,36,55,56,58,70,71,72,75,
128,161,162
Multifamily (multi-unit) recycling, 11,14, 30,
43,75,77,80,81,82,104,110,123,139,
140,146,155,167,172-173
Municipal solid waste, 10,26,48,64,78,98,118,
136,152,168
definition, 5
Newspapers, 19,20,37,38,39,57,71,89,109,
130,145,162,179,180,181. See also
Commercial materials recovery,
materials targeted; Drop-off centers,
materials targeted; and Residential
materials recovery; materials targeted
Nonprofit groups, 15,18,28,29,32,34,49,80,81,
88,100,154,156,158,161,170,171,174,
175
Operating and maintenance costs, 22,33,42,59,
60,74,85,91,93,101, 111, 112,132,147,
164,165,175,183,184
Paint, 12,158,171
Pallets, 36,105,128,133
Paper,
mixed, see Mixed paper,
newspaper, see Newspapers
high-grade, see High-grade paper
Participation rates, 13,15,20,30,51,67,80,81,
101,112,122,133,139,140,155,170,171
definition, 5
Pick-up frequency,
recydables,
commercial, 14,31,52,68,83,123,141,
142,157,173
^ residential, 13,29,51,67,81,101,104,
121,122,139,140,155,171
yard waste, 18,35,56,87,107,127,178
Pilot programs, 12,15,23,29,30,31,35,40,50,
51,53,54,55,56,58,60,68,80,81,100,
101,103,126,138,144,148,154,155,170,
176,177,182
Plastics, 37,55,71,90,99,130,162,170,174,175,
176,179,180,182
polystyrene (PS), 23,29,52,80,90,105,121,
158,170
high density polyethylene (HOPE), 14,16,
17,19,37,49,52,53,54,67,69,70,
71,85,101,104,105,106,109,121,
122,123,124,125,130,139,141,142,
143,145,158,162,170,179,180
low density polyethylene (LDPE), 170,179
polyethylene terephthalate (PET), 16, 17,
37,49,52,53,54,57,66,67,69,70,
71,85,101,104,105,106,109,123,
125,130,139,141,142,143,145,156,
158,159,160,162,170,171,175,176,
179,180,181
Precycling, 29,39,90,182
Prison workers, 18,87,88,94
Processing, 16-17,34,54-55,69-70,85-86,105-
106,124-125,142-143,159-160,175-176
automated, 85,105-106,125,142-143,159-
160,175
commingled, 54,69,85,105-106,125,142-
143,159,175
contract, 34,70,142-143
costs, 16,21,22,41,42,59,60,70,72,73-74,
91,92,93,112,132,146,147,175,
183 184
facilities, 16,17,34,54, 69,85,100,105,113,
124,138,142,159,175
local, 34,142,175
low/medium tech, 16,34,54
regional, 16,69,85,105,124,159
residue/reject rate, 16,34,70,85,106,125,
143,175,176
segregated, 34,124
Procurement, 17,34,55,58,75,86,100,103,106,
111, 125,160
Page 189
-------
Index
Recovery levels,
commercial, 3,10,26,48,64,98,118,136,
152,168
construction and demolition debris, 10,26,
48,98,152,168
of communities studied, 3,10,26,48,64,78,
98,118,136,152,168
residential, 10,26,48,64,98,118,136,152,
168
Recycling,
contacts, 23,43,61,75,95,114,133,148,166,
185
collection, see Collection
containers,
bags, 30,51
bins, 13,67,82,139,156,157
boxes, 30,51
buckets, 15,101
stackable bins, 172
toters, 140,157,172,173
curriculum, 94,146,163,165
definition,
goals, 28,66,79,99,120,138,154,169
processing, see Processing
revenues, 15,22,28,33,43,61,70,75,94,100,
102,113,133,143,147,164,165,174,
177,185
vehicles, see Collection vehicles
Refillable containers, 30, 32,34,125
Refuse,
collection and disposal, 11,26-27,48,64-65,
78,98,118-119,136-138,152-153,
168-169
costs, see Disposal costs
definition, 5
Residential materials recovery,
materials targeted, 13,19,30,39,51,57,67,
71,81,101,122,139,145,156,171,
180
recovery levels, 3,10,26,48,64,98,118,136,
152,168
Reuse, see Salvage/reuse
Salvage/reuse, 16,28,29,32,33,54,66,69,84,
103,106,159,175
Scavenging recydables, 13,29,30,102,139,155,
156,158,166
Scrap metals, 16,19,55,69,72,75,83,84,122,
123,124,125,142,145,153,174
Self-hauling of refuse, 48,118,169
Set-out of compostables, 18,35,56,87,107,127,
178
Set-out of recyclables, 13,14,30,51,52,67,82,
101,122,139,156,172,173
Source reduction, 28,29,39,58,81,90,145,154,
163,182. See also Volume-based rates,
Backyard composting, Precyding, and
Salvage/reuse
Telephone books, 157
Textiles, 37,38,89,141,162
Tipping fees,
composting, 18,36,128,144,178
recycling, 16,33,69,70,85,143
refuse, 10,26,27,48,64,65,66,69,75,78,98,
100,118,119,131,136,137,147,152,
168
Tires, 48,49,50,66,69,70,71,72,83,84,85,86,
89,91,101,102,104,105,106,109, 111,
125,160,162
Total waste, 10,26,48,64,78,98,118,136,152,
168
definition, 5
Vehicles, see Collection vehicles
Volume-based refuse rates, 27,30,35,156,157,
172
Voluntary programs, 13,18,30,35,51,56,67,
122,123,127,155,171
Volunteers, 12,17,51,102,126,177
Waste generation, 10,26,48,64,78,98,118,136,
152,168
Waste Management, Inc. (WMI), 11,27,64,98,
100,103,105,108,168,170,173,175,176
White goods, 16,19,33,37,38,48,53,54,55,57,
66,67,69,70,71,72,75,84,86,89,101,
102,106,109, 111, 141,148,162
Wood waste, 17,35,36,37,60,70,89,104,106,
109,126,128,130,133,137,141,142,144,
148,180
Yard waste, 35-36,37,38,40,48,49,50,55-56,
58,60-61,66,70-71,75,86-88,91,92,93,
99,104,105,106,107-108, 111, 120,121,
126-128,130,131,132,133,142,144,148,
161,162,171,175,176-178,179,180,182,
183
brush, 48,55,58,70,177
grass dippings, 50,70,86,88,120,126,127,
148,177
landscapers1,35,36,37,55,60,70,108,128,
129,131
leaves, 17-18,19, 35-36, 37,56,57,70,86-87,
88,107-108,109,126-127,130,176-
178,180
Page 190
------- |