United States Region 10 Alaska
Environmental Protection 1200 Sixth Avenue Idaho
Agency Seattle WA 98101 Oregon
Washington
G CPA
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
THE FEASIBILITY OF A COMMUNITY OWNED AND OPERATED RECYCLING PROJECT
IN A DEPRIVED SOCIO-ECONOMIC NEIGHBORHOOD
-------
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
THE FEASIBILITY OF A COMMUNITY OWNED AND OPERATED RECYCLING PROJECT
IN A DEPRIVED SOCIO-ECONOMIC NEIGHBORHOOD
BY
Al-Dean Harold Jackson
Environmental Studies 499, Independent Study
Dr. L. Edwin Coate
March 17, 1977
OS. EPA UKNH REGION 10 MATBWLS
¦minium
RXODOOObMflb
-------
OUTLINE
I. Introduction
A. Statement of Problem: Recycling of Recyclables is a
feasible method of solid waste diposal in socially and economical-
ly deprived communities.
1. Hypothesis
2. Statements from literature search
B. Body: Explanation of creating a specially designed
recycling project for the Central Seattle Area.
1. Project obejctive - The construction and preserva-
tion of a self-sustaining recycling center within a Mini-Park.
a. Job creation
b. Exception of 30% (by weight) of recyclable
waste
c. Recycling made a habit
2. Proposed plan - The description of proposed plan.
a. Discussion of constraints
(1) Employees
(2) Transportation
(3) Cash flow delay
(4) Insurance
b. Discussion of contingencies
(1) Advertising and education
(a) Advertising
(b) Environmental educational instruction
(2) Donations
(3) Contractual agreements
x
-------
3. Evaluation - The benefits of recycling.
a. Municipality benefits
b. Citizen benefits
c. Community benefits
c. Environmental benefits
, Conclusion
1. Summary
2. Conclusion
Bibliography
Appendix
1. Statement of Revenue Distribution
2. Statement of Salaries and Wages
3. Map of Central Seattle Boundaries
4. Value Matrix
xi
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT 2
Section I 4
INTRODUCTION 5
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM 7
Section II 11
PROJECT OBJECTIVE 12
ESTABLISHMENT OF PROJECT 12
Board of Trustees of Comm/Org. (CSCCF). 13
Land for the Site 13
Materials and Labor for Structure 15
Equipment and Machinery 15
Creation of Jobs 17
Supervision of Workers and Equipment 18
PRESERVATION OF PROJECT 19
~Adequate Volume 19
Section III 24
PROPOSED PLAN 25
Constraints 26
Employees 26
Transportation 27
Cash Flow Delay 27
Insurance ^8
xii
-------
Contingencies 28
Advertising and Education 29
Advertising 29
Environmental Educational Instruction......... 31
Donations 31
Contractual Agreements 34
Section IV 36
EVALUATION 37
Municipal Benefits 38
Citizen Benefits 39
Community Benefits 39
Environmental Benefits 40
CONCLUSION 42
SUMMARY 43
CONCLUSION 44
BIBLIOGRAPHY 46
APPENDIX 49
STATEMENT OF REVENUE DISTRIBUTION 50
STATEMENT OF SALARIES AND WAGES 52
MAP OF CENTRAL SEATTLE BOUNDARIES 53
VALUE MATRIX 54
xi i i
-------
LIST OF DIAGRAMS AND STATEMENTS
DIAGRAMS page
Organizational Structure Diagram 14
Center Layout Diagram 16
STATEMENTS
Statement of Projected Annual Income 21-22
Statement of Initial Capital Outlay 33
xiv
-------
2.
ABSTRACT
Preliminary research indicates that a successful recycling operation can
be conducted in a socially and economically deprived neighorhood provided that
there are a high volumes of waste to be collected, adequate equipment to
handle the collections, and, most important, monetary compensation for
citizens who separate and transport valuable components of the waste stream to
the collection site.
— This report will examine the following hypotheses:
— Compensation is the key to success; citizens in these deprived com-
munities will actively engage in recycling activities if they can derive an
immediate benefit. The project is expected to test this hypothesis by arrang-
ing for the issuance of money in exchange for recyclable waste.
— Waste must be recycled in adequate volume to provide sufficient cash to
support the money payments.
-- Equipment that can rapidly and efficiently move and process (if possible)
the recyclable waste is necessary to achieve the necessary volume turnover.
~ This report will also examine the effectiveness of an educational effort
to inform the community residents of (a) the requirements for recycling, i.e.,
separation of the waste materials into recycTables to a collection center; (b)
-------
3.
the need for citizens to transport recyclables to a collection center; and (c)
the opportunities for personal satisfaction resulting from the use of dollar
payments.
Throughout, the project will rely on involved community institutions,
testing in some degree the influence of those institutions on members of the
community.
The objective of this research is to show recycling as a feasible
alternative method of solid waste disposal in deprived socio-economic
communities. The research will include a literature search on recycling in
the United States. However, we will be specifically concerned with the
recycling of cans, both aluminum and bi-metal, glass—green, clear and
brown—and paper, including newsprint and other fine grades. There will also
be an emphasis on the recycling of beer bottles for redistribution.
The economic benefits of recycling solid waste will also be emphasized.
Resourcesvare limited and they are valuable in respect to what resources are
and will be available. Recycling could be thought of as inevitable. The
literature substantiates this point.
-------
4.
Section I
-------
5.
INTRODUCTION
From a socio-economic perspective, present methods of disposing of high
volumes of solid waste perpetuate an old, unnecessary environmental problem:
landfills. Solid waste can be disposed of more efficiently and much of its
content can be recycled for use as an energy resource. The disposal of solid
waste involves heavy expenditures—often ranking behind only schools and roads
in terms of its impact on local government budgets. These expenditures are
disproportionately wasteful in that the quantities of solid waste landed
include materials that could be recycled profitably. Furthermore, space is a
major cost; that is, landfills are costly to maintain and,if not maintained
properly, may cause serious environmental problems. Recyclable materials
(processed natural resources, i.e., cans, glass, and paper) have an economic
value; in a society where resources are increasingly scarce, they should be
utilized to their fullest potential. If recyclable wastes are identified and
separated where used, i.e., at home or shop, then conceivably those
recyclables could be reclaimed without becoming part of an area's solid waste
stream. In this manner, valuable resources could be saved from wasteful
handling and landfill disposal. Where waste materials can be aggregated on a
community basis, recycling can reduce the volume of waste material presently
being disposed of, and can cut the costs of such disposal.
The project has as its goal establishment and maintenance of a
community owned and operated recycling center. This center would: (1) create
jobs to aid in solving the unemployment crisis; (2) reserve 30 percent (by
-------
weight) of the recyclable waste from the proposed area solid waste stream;
make recycling a habit; and (4) distribute approximately $13,160 to $84,560
per year to the community residents.
-------
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Preliminary research indicates that a successful recycling project can
be conducted in a low income community provided there is adequate equipment to
handle collected recyclables, a high volume of recyclables to accommodate such
equipment, and—most important—monetary compensation for citizens who
separate and transport valuable components of the waste stream to the col-
lection site (confident that their community will experience an economic
benefit.)
Adequate equipment is that equipment necessary to move those quantities
of recyclables available in the proposed area. This equipment would be semi-
sopisticated and would require a small degree of training to operate.
Clearly, the operation of this equipment, in addition to the continued running
of the project, would create meaningful jobs. The success of the recycling
project would depend greatly upon the proper use of equipment.
In direct parallel, within any given community, there are known
quantities of recyclable solid waste material. These materials compose
approximately 63 percent (by weight) of the total solid waste stream
nationally.-^ Of that amount only 10 percent (by weight) of the recyclable
solid waste nationally is currently being recycled. ; ^ ~
"1/ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Resource Recovery and Waste
Reduction, staff of the Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
(Washington: Government Printing Office, 1975), p. 9. (Resource
Recovery and Waste Reduction is hereafter referred as RECOVERY.)
-------
The 90 percent (by weight) remaining of the 63 percent would seem to be
adequate to support a community recycling project.
With monetary compensation as the key incentive for success, it is
hypothesized that a recycling habit would be induced if immediate payment
could be derived. It is further hypothesized that broader awareness and
understanding of the benefits of environmental protection (i.e., solid waste
management) would result from the establishment of a relationship between
dollars and reclaimable waste materials. As a means of testing the above
hypotheses, money payments are to be made in a low income area of Seattle in
exchange for recyclable materials (cans, glass, and paper).
The Environmental Protection Agency, Region X Library performed a
computerized literature search in December 1976. The search covered all known
United States reclamation operations similar to the one discussed herein. The
results indicate that there were several reclamation operations in existence
in the nation. They varied, however, in the type of materials reclaimed,
style of operation, and sponsoring organizations. For example, Aluminum
Company of America, Alcoa Labs, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, undertook a project
in 1976 sponsored by Alcoa to study the effects of aluminum reclamation and
processed recycling. The following is a description of the findings;
"Scrap aluminum can be recycled to the ingot stage
for 5 percent or less of the energy to produce
primary aluminum with savings in other resources....
In the collecting area, the problems are promoting
-------
9.
compacting of cans by consumer, sorting aluminum for
refuse, and developing tabless cans."-/
Illustrating the variety of types of operations. Consider this project
funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Resource and
Development at the cost of $61,161. "The plant will recover steel, glass,
aluminum, other non-ferrous metals, and some paper. The subject contract is
to: (a) prepare an environmental impact assessment for the complete resource
recovery program..This project was performed by the National Center
for Resource Recovery at Washington D.C. in 1974. Indeed, there are other
more closely related reclamation operations than the literature search re-
vealed. The city of Sommerville, Massachusetts and the town of Marblehead,
Massachusetts are involved in a municipally administered recycling project.
Preliminary studies were submitted to EPA, Research and Development
Department, wherein funds were secured to do further development. "As a
result of these promising studies, EPA awarded grants to each community to
demonstrate source separation for a three year period. EPA funded these
programs in order to demonstrate the document approaches to recycling that
would be of interest and value to a range of municipalities across the United
2/ * i iterature Search on Recycling (MSS U.S. Environmental
^'Computerized Literature o Seatt1e)> report on reclamation operations
Protection Agency Region x LiDrary, Smiths0nian Science Information
in the United St^®32g^m^ecycling of Glass, Paper, and Aluminum Cans," p.7.
-/ibid. p. 12.
-------
10.
4/
States."- These projects are still in process; however, the fact that EPA
did in fact fund these programs should indicate the need for alternative
solid waste disposal methods.
The Portland Recycling Team established the Portland Recycling Center
five years ago to serve the citizens of that community and help solve a
serious environmental problem (solid waste disposal). This operation is the
closest in design and style to the one proposed. Their five year track
record shows the conmunity based recycling will work if given the opportunity.
Source separation does not seem to be the total solution to the solid
waste problem. However, recycling offers one partial alternative. Furthermore
compostable material would still be disposed of in the present manner.
a/ nn »cntirce separation in Somerville and Marblehead,
— Report CgJ?™, h5°«-Sr ^vtrrnimental-frotectton Agency Region 10
Massachusetts, JeLnt)report on source separation recycling in
Office of Solid Waste Manag^ntj, Inc., March 1 , 1976, RPA
those areas, by Resounce p1aH ®fter this collection 1s cited as SOME.
Reference IRA-76-06, P-"- Hereafter
-------
n.
SECTION II
-------
Congressional Findings
Sec. 1002. (b) Environment & Health - The Congress finds with respect to
environment and health that:
"(1) although land is to valuable a national resource
to be needlessly polluted by discarded materials, most
solid waste is disposed of on land in open dumps and
sanitary landfills (6) alternative to existing
methods of land disposal must be developed since many
of the citites in the Unites State will be running out
of suitable solid waste disposal sites within five
years unless immediate action is taken".
--The Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1976 (PL 94-580)
PROJECT OBJECTIVE
Establishment of Project
To build and preserve a self-sustaining recycling center within a mini-
park of the Central Seattle area would create jobs, likely expect 30% (by
weight) of that area's recyclable materials, and make recycling within that
community a habit.
The proposed recycling project would include a buildingnnside a mini-
Park, to be supported and governed by a community organization and managed by the
Board of Trustees. The organization, through hired labor, would receive the
recyclables at the site where they would be processed, stored, and then
shipped after adequate quantities have been accumulated. A park setting for
community collection of recyclable refuse has demonstrated appeal to citizens
who recycle. This concept was tested in New York City by the Village Green
-------
13.
5/
Recycling Center.- In addition, the construction of the mini-park
conceivably would add beauty to the recycling center.
Board of Trustees of Community Organization (CSCCF)
The Board of Trustees would be composed of concerned citizens of the
community who are committed to the establishment of the recycling center. The
Central Seattle Community Council Federation (CSCCF), a non-profit organiza-
tion located in Seattle's Central Area, has been selected to measure the
validity of the concepts presented in this report. Direct community in-
volment would be expected because of its twenty-seven individual community
councils that make up CSCCF structure. Ken Fail, acting president of this
organization stated, "...this organization is interested in establishing a
recycling center if preliminary funding monies can be obtained for its
start.He also stated that preliminary support for the establishment of the
said facility would include, at a minimum: 1) a detailed market research
study, 2) an equipment needs study, and 3) a site feasibility study.
Land for Site
The land for the center would be leased from the city government to the
non-profit organization at low cost for a specific number of years Leasing
would enable the city to retain ownership of the property.
—^Film "The Village Green," (MSS Office of Public Affairs, U.S.
Environmental'Protection Agency Region X), report on Greenwich Village
recycling center and mini-park, 1974.
-^Statement by Ken Fail, acting president, in a personal interview,
Seattle, Washington, November 22, 1976.
-------
ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE DIAGRAM
Recycling
Unit
J
-------
15.
Materials and Labor for Structure
Materials and labor to construct a building, of a design and type suitable
for operations, would be provided by donation from enterprises in the greater
Seattle area. Such support is available proven by material gathering for
the Mercer Island Bicentennial Park and Recycling CenterJJ Labor to erect the
building would come from high schools in the proposed area (supervised by the
United Construction Workers (UCW), a building contractor organization also
in Seattle's Central Area. Such use of high school students would provide
valuable training in a trade and develop interest in this specific project and
ecology. This concept was tested with the Mercer Island Recycling Center.5/
Equipment and Machinery
As the volume of material handled rises to adequate levels, equipment would
be required to operate the center efficiently. The equipment would similar to
9/
that presently in use at a commercially operated center in North Seattle.-
Briefly described, six to seven dumpster bin containers measuring six feet
high, eight feet wide, twenty feet long would be needed. Each container
would be assigned a recyclable. Citizens transporting recyclables to the center
would deposit items into the appropriately labeled container. Light machinery,
such as fork lifts and trucks would be required to stack certain recyclables for
fork lifts and trucks would be required to stack certain recyclables for
—Observation and Interview at the Mercer Island Recycling Center and
Bicentennial Park, Mercer Island, Washington, August 10, 1976. Hereafter this
collection is cited as MI.
-^MI, August 10, 1976
-------
CENTER LAYOUT
/ir
//
/<
'zcTn-csH
-*—p(Jhre>KEP- titNe?
Ey-rAhie>tod
-------
17.
shipping and hauling (for example, crates of stubby beer bottles). Operations
of this machinery would require a minimum degree of training to be safe and
effective. Other equipment such as hand trucks, gloves, face protectors—for
glass crushers—and scales, etc., would be necessary.
The project would rely upon the institutions involved to evaluate the useful-
ness of this project.
Creation of Jobs
Initial research revealed that lack of dependable workers present one of
the major problems in recycling center operations. Most centers use volunteer
labor, individual performance and consistency of Center's, employees vary. This plan
avoids^ Problem since it involves, paid positions. The Randolph Carter
Industrial Workshop Association is a training center for handicapped persons.
Orin Webb, the center's director stated: "Yes, I would be willing to
incorporate a recycling training component into my program."-!^ Further-
more, co-unity youth of working age and retired elderly citizens could be
hired together with handicapped workers, to perform all functions of the
center's operations. toTTf senior citizens presents a special problem that will
be discussed later in this report.
^Observation, at Rob's Texaco and Recycling Seattle Washington,
August 4, 1976. Hereafter this collection is cited
—^Statement by Orin Webb, director, in a personal interview, Seattle,
Washington, September 22, 1976.
-------
18.
Several youth organizations are already established within the proposed
area. The Central Area Youth Association (CAYA) c/o Central Area Motivation
Program and Youth Unlimited are organizations which could provide a sufficient
number of pre-teen and teens for employment in the center.
The inclusion of retired persons as one segment of the labor force could
help overcome a serious social problem. It would be desirable to involve 1
senior citizens since they would be a great benefit to the center andtto the other
workers in the area of morale and discipline. Active recruiting would be
through community churches and other senior organizations.
At least one administrative position would be created to handle.bookkeeping.
Supervision of Workers and Equipment
To insure efficiency and safety, site managers (a manager and an assistant
manager) would be utilized. These managers would be responsible to the Board
of Trustees for all phases of the operations of the center.
Manager duties would include keeping accurate records of the quantities of
recyclables handled through the center, monitoring the flow of monies,
supervision of the weighing of received recyclables, and insured patron
courtesy.
-------
19.
PRESERVATION OF PROJECT
Adequate Volume
It is estimated that approximately $26,200 in revenue per year would be
necessary to operate the center at a break even point. Assuming 11-1/2 per-
cent of the proposed area recyclables are received and processed, the center
will generate a profit {see graph page 20.) This 11-1/2 percent is
adequate volume.
The Board of Trustees of CSCCF should not extract any funds that would
jeopardize the centers operations. However, when a profit is realized, monies
would be placed into a special fund for allocation only to the co-unity for
projects or programs that the Board of Trustees sees as Important. Realis-
tically projected, none of the profits would be realized before the first
eighteen months.
-------
S lef*, £
t 2£f)a 2 2 2 30?„ = 2 4eP]0
a^ $LA-vfaMjLA)
tr
-------
CENTRAL SEATTLE RECYCLING PROJECT
STATEMENT OF ANNUAL PROJECTED INCOME
BEST
REASONABLE
Except
@ 30% (by weight) 75% Newsprint
GROSS
REVENUES: !
"STass (Gullet)
Bi-metal
Aluminum
Newspaper
Fine Paper j[-'
Stubbies '"2
TOTAL REVENUES
$20,030
9,120
19,770
16,300
33,240
52,800
SIS? 766
$10,020
4,560
9,890
13,440
17,200
17,600
$7ijlo
WORST
National Avg.
Presently
riT34a
300-
2,640
13,440
1,200
5,280
$24,200
ESTIMATED EXPENSES:*
Purchases 84,560 38,600 71
Salaries1 9,775 5,200 52qq
Wages 13,110 6,555 c«
Payroll Taxes* 2,800 1,400 I'ann
Land 10 10 ~
Insurance* 3,000 3,000 nnn
Utilities 3,400 3,400 ~r«Xr
Supplies , 1,800 1,200 t'pdo
Advertising"5 10,000 2,400 p'dnn
Hauling 1,400 300 30q
Equipment (Main) 7,500 7,500 7 5on
Misc. 1,000 1,000 I'nnX
TOTAL EXPENSES: $138,345 $70,565 $4TTH
PROJECTED NET
INCOME $ 13,405 $ 2,145 $20,925
^ See State of Salaries and Wages
2 See Insurance
3 See Advertising
* See Notes pg. 23
-------
CENTRAL SEATTLE RECYCLING PROJECT
STATEMENT OF ANNUAL PROJECTED INCOME
FOR 19XX
BEST REASONABLE
Except
@ 30% (by weight) 15% Newsprint
NET REVENUES
Glass (Cullet) $1,020
Bi-metal Cans 4,560
Aluminum Cans 9,880
Newspaper 8,400
Fine Paper 19,940
Stubbies 14,400
TOTAL REVENUES $67,200
$ 5,000
2,280
4,940
6,720
10,320
4,800
WORST
National Avg
Presently
670
150
1,300
6,720
720
1,440
$n?06
-------
NOTES
^ Beer Bottles
Adequate data is not available, therefore estimates were used via
66 month average from Rob's Texaco and Recycling (North Seattle,
March 30, 1977} at 50,606 cases of stubby beer bottles over a 66
month period. National average volume is 2% of the above total
and 15% is an average between the two.
1-2
Fine Paper
Fine paper data taken from Portland Recycling Team, February, 1977,
inventory report (March 24, 1977). National average is 1 ton per
month calculated to show revenues per year. And 15% is an average
between the two.
* Revenues
Revenues were calculated using 3.3 lis of solid waste generated
nationally in 1973 per person per day. (U.S. EPA, Resource
Recovery and tfaste Reduction, 1975, p.5). The population used was
42,418 taken from Seattle Census data of 1970 — see appendix,
Map of Central Area Boundaries.
* Expenses
Extimates of expenses fcther than the one footnoted) given determined
from the Portland Recycling Team Statement of Revenues and Expenses
for 1976.
-------
SECTION III
-------
PROPOSED PLAN
The proposed plan envisages a paying type of recycling center, using paid
employees and a volunteer Board of Trustees. Recyclable waste would be
required to be transported to the center. The tools of this plan which makes
it feasible are overcoming the constraints, and the creation of incentives.
Fundamentally, the proposed plan relies on three basic entities:
—Citizen is anyone who chooses to use the recycling center;
—Center is the physical structure which would handle the recyclable
waste. The unit would be located in a mini-park and include equipment and
machinery described earlier. Together with the mini-park containing trees,
flowers, shrubbery, benches and other park related accessories, the recycling
Center is the foundation of the project.
-Marketing Agent, a private entrepenuer, who would sell collected
recyclables. Gene Turra of Rob's Texaco and Recycling (North Seattle) has
expressed an interest in becoming the Marketing Agent for this project.il'
Mr. Turra's 6 years of successful experience in the recycling business,
encourages the hope that such a union would benefit the project by reducing
contractual agreements to a minimum.
The process would start with the citizen who would separate, prepare and
transport recyclable waste to the Center. Standard methods of preparation of
JJ/roB, meeting interview, August 26, 1976.
-------
26.
recyclables (glass, cans, newspaper, and etc.) have already been
12/
established.—
The Citizen would receive dollar payment for recyclables. After materials
are received, the Center1s staff would stack and store them until sufficient
quantities are accumulated. Next, the collected recyclables would be
transported to the Marketing Agents reception station by the staff for resale.
Constraints
Dependable employees, transportation, cash flow delay, and insurance are
special problems experienced by small recycling operations.
Employees
Without dependable employees, the proposed recycling Center would have a
low probability of success. "Developing a core of reliable volunteers who
will make themselves available on a regular basis to man the collection site
is a hard, but necessary task....'^7 To solve this problem employee wages
would be absorbed by the Center s revenues.
Under this plan the volunteer board members would be residents of the
c *hat would benefit economically from the proposed Center. Along
communities that wouia Deriei ru
^Literature available, Recycling Information Service State of
Washington Department of Ecology.
Wlhe Environmental Action Coalition,^.,
Program for flip Organization , J Election is citea as mmk.
Program, 1977. p. (sec. FJ. "erea'
-------
with strong leadership within the Central Seattle Community Council Federation
administration, minimum difficulty should be experienced. A dual obligation
to the project would hopefully exist, ones of organizational and community
commitment.
Transportation
Control of the cost of hauling recyclable materials is regarded as
essential to the success of the Center. "The last problem to which the
program must conform is transportation... The type of truck needed will
depend upon volume collected, the condition of the material, and distance to
be traveled. Without a loading dock, a truck with a hydraulic lift on .the
tail gate will be needed, especially if you are moving drums of crushed
glass...With a donated truck and a volunteer driver, thejprogram is about
guaranteed success"—'' Expense involved in hauling would also be absorbed
by the Center revenues. Hauling costs would be low because Citizens would
transport recyclables to the recycling center, The only transportation
expense anticipated is related to the hauling of collected materials from the
Center to the Marketing Agent.
Cash Flow Delay
Delays or interruptions in recyclable's resale payments could cause severe
bottlenecks in the functioning of the Center. Private entrepreneurs report
that there are inconvenient delays of check payment for marketed materials
(collected and prepared recyclables) ranging from 10 days to 2 weeks. Such
delays seriously hamper the cash flow of a cash paying type center.
—''manual, p. (sec. H)
-------
28.
Lack of adequate working capital would seriously decrease the probability
of the Centers success. To meet this challenge of cash flow delay, a subsidy
1 c
of about $6,000 would be necessary (see donations) .
Insurance
For some larger operations insurance costs are very high. Public
liability, unemployment, workmens compensation, and Social Security compose
what is referred to as insurance in this report. These high expenses extract
a significant portion of the generated revenues. For example, Portland
Recycling Team paid $9,008 in total insurance expense according to their
end-of-fiscal year, June 30, 1976 Income Statement. Those expenses included
Medical and Health coverage that is necessary in cases where machinery is
used.—'t. This $9,008 was about 73.5 percent of the total revenues for that
year.
Under the proposed plan, these costs would probably have to be absorbed by
revenues from the sale of collected recyclables. Even though this plan as
proposed has no effective resolution to this problem, it is significant and
should be watched closely.
Contingencies
Advertising and education, donations, and contractual agreements are
conditions pertinent to the success of the Center. Without these factors the
project would not be feasible under this plan.
—''ROB, quote, March 30, 1977.
—/Portland Recycling Team's, "Statement of Revenues and Expense,"
June 30, 1976.
-------
30.
radio, and newspapers. Several of these methods have already demonstrated
effectivenss. The most effective, according to the Somerville project,
is newspaper ads. "Feedback from residents indicate newspaper coverage has
been a very effective means of communication about the project..."15/
In the proposed area, because of the money incentive, a comparable if not
greater response to recycling, would be expected using similar advertising
methods.
"Cash for Caring about our Community" would be the theme of the campaign,
or some other appropriate slogan. Time required of patrons would be minimal.
"Requirements for household source separation efforts consume minimal amounts
of time and are not costly...The total of 15.9 minutes per week to prepare all
the material is about 2 minutes per day... The frequency of delivery averaged
about once per month during the study.Time invested in recycling would
aid community growth.
It would seem as though the storage of one month's waste would surely be
a problem for the average household. Not so, physical storage space for one
household is not usually a problem. For example, newspapers when bundled and
stacked, do not require any more additional space for a one-week period com-
pared with a one m.tl. accumulated period,^ according to an Environmental
.flnru rPDort, wherein 13 different types of centers
Protection Agency efficiency report, wire
were studied nationally-
—/ Ibid.
22/u.s. Environmental Protection^Agency,^Analvsis^of^Source^Separation^^
—^Ibid., p.12.
-------
29.
Advertising and Education
Advertising and Environmental Educational Instruction would be used to
inform Citizens of recycling. The monetary benefit available through
recycling, minimum time and effort required to prepare recyclables for the
Center, and the location of the Center would be the focus of Advertising. The
purpose of Environmental Educational Instruction would be to instruct the
public on the necessity for source separation through a variety of presentations.
"You need a public relations campaign to get the community to cooperate",—'' says
Thomas F. Williams, chief of the solid waste technical information and communica-
tions branch of the EPA. The effectiveness of a public relations campaign can be
shown by Somerville 35 percent reduction in recyclable solid waste. This
reduction is 5 percent greater than their anticipated goal.
Making the conmunity residents aware of the need for recycling would be the
focus of this public education campaign. The campaign would use public speeches
and workshops at a projected cost of approximately $10,000 per year.—'f The
desired effect is to make source separation a habit in the proposed area.
Advertising
Making community residents aware of the value in recycling is a necessity.
The Board of Trustees would be responsible for a continuous advertising campaign.
Proposed methods are cable and commercial television,
¦12/charles Dunsire, "Recycling at Home Best, Says EPA Aid," Seattle Post-
Intelligencer, March 23, 1977, p.7 col.3.
—/SOME, p. 26.
-------
31.
The location and hours of operation of the Center have not been deter-
mined, although proposed days and hours are as follows; Tuesday through
Thursday 11:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. This
would be the time when patrons would have an opportunity to receive payment
for their recyclables. However, recyclables could be dropped of at any time.
The primary emphasis of advertising would accent upon the transportation
of the recyclables to the Certter.
Environmental Educational Instruction
Knowledge of destruction to the environment caused By present methods of
solid waste disposal is the objective of environmental educational instruction.
Workshops, lectures, speeches, etc. would be the methods used by the Board
of Trustees to assure that the public becomes aware of the necessity of source
separation. "The Somerville teachers workshop, soon after the recycling program
started, produced much more active participation than those held prior to
start up."^/ The focus of this concept is to make clear what source separation
is, and tell how the public can help save our environment.
Donations
The chief means of funding for the start of this project would be through
donations (see pate 33). To obtain the necessary donations 501(C) (3) tax
status would be used to solicit needed equipment, monies, materials, etc. This
tax status is a special one that allows donors to deduct the full value of
asset(s) donated. This status also allows for the tax-free receipt of such
££/S0ME, p,53,
-------
32.
assets to continue a non-profit purpose.—'' (For example, if XYZ college
administers a business wherein the net proceeds aid the college in continuing
its purpose of education, a gift of $100,000 to the business could be received
using the proposed status, and the college would not be required to pay on
this donation. The donor of the $100,000 also could deduct the full amount of
that donation from his taxable income.) However, tax laws are constantly
changing and the interpretations relating to an individual case should be done
by a person knowledgable on taxes. The Central Seattle Community Council
Federation has this tax exempt status, says Ken Fail, Acting President.—^
This tax status would be useful to obtain necessities to start the project.
Research revealed the following would be needed at a minimum:
— Land for site or location of the center. Research indicates that a
section of city owned land would seem to be ideal.
— Materials and labor to construct a building; discussed earlier (see
Materials and Labor for Structure).
—Equipment and machinery to carry on the functions of the Center (see
Equipment and Machinery).
—Money for futher studies and—crucially important—approximately $6,000
for working capital. This $6,000 would be used to offset the Cash Flow
23/
— Recycling Workshop Report, "How to Start and Operate a Recycling
Center," (MSS with Recycling Information Service, State of Washington
Department of Ecology), presented as part of the Living Light Conference, by
Recycling Information Service, State of Washington Department of Ecology 1976
p. (Federal Tax-Exempt Status.)
—^Statement by Ken Fail, Acting President, in a personal interview,
Seattle, Washington, November 4, 1976.
-------
CENTRAL SEATTLE RECYCLING PROJECT
STATEMENT OF PROJECTED INITIAL CAPITAL OUTLAY
STUDIES1
-Site
-Equipment
-Market
SOURCE
Undetermi ned
COST ESTIMATE
Undetermi ned
LIFE
20 years
LAND*
Undetermi ned
-0-
20 years
33.
BUILDING"
Undetermi ned Undetermi ned
EQUIPMENT & ETC.4 Undetermined Undetermined
Undetermi ned
Undetermined
WORKING CAPITAL5 Undetermined
$6,000
^See, Board of Trustees of Comm/Org. (CSCCF).
^See, Materials and Land for Structure.
3lbid.
4See, Equipment and Machinery.
^See, Cash Flow Delay.
-------
34.
DsTay problem and allow the Center1 to function efficiently, making enough
money available to accomodate payments for transported source separated recyclables.
Contractual Agreement
Research revealed fine paper grades are discarded in landfills in
significant quantities annually. Business, large and small, discard valuable
marketable print out and tab cards, ledger papers and manilla folders on a
continuous basis. Of the total national solid waste stream, 7 percent is fine
25/
paper.— At the present market prices, 30 percent of this 7 percent would
generate substantial revenues for a recycling center.
To insure such revenues for the proposed recycling center, paper
contractual agreements are a must. That is, specific quantities of fine paper
must be handled through the center on a regular basis. The proposed plan
would require some type of contractual agreement with proposed area businesses
to assure that revenues that could to be generated are obtained. This concept
is crucial to the center's success.
The resale of recyclables to the Marketing Agent would require some^type
of agreement. That is, either payment would be received at the time of
delivery or it would be received after resale of the recyclable materials.
However, possible advantages and disadvantages should be carefully considered
before any agreement is undertaken.
—Recovery, p. 9
-------
A quick turnaround on Cash Flow would be a helpful advantage; wherein
immediate payment is received for delivered recycTables. Reduced hauling
costs would also be a helpful advantage. With the several different markets
for recyclables, hauling large quantities of recyclables to different markets
would generate a high hauling expense.
Conversely, using a single source to market collected recyclables could
produce a reduction in payment for those recyclables. That is, the cost for
using a Marketing Agent would be deducted from the reimbursements received by
the Center. This disadvantage would probably exist whether or not payment is
received immediately upon delivery or after recyclables are resold.
-------
SECTION IV
-------
37.
EVALUATION
The proof of feasibility based on available data is not highly
conclusive. Research performed was on the very basic level and should be
considered as such; to a large degree estimates were used to generate the
data used herein. "However, the risks associated with implementing resource
recovery programs does not appear large even if substantial errors exist in
the estimate," (professors of the Graduate School of Business at the
University of Washington).—'' They go on to say,
"another factor which tends to make separation and
terminal processing more attractive is that of
reduction of bulk of wastes which must ultimately be
disposed of in a landfill. Accurate figures are
difficult to obtain, but it is likely that costs on
the order $2.00 would be avoided for every ton of
material diverted froojythe landfill by separation and
terminal processing."—
The results in Massachusetts tend to confirm the view of the University of
Washington professors. Those showed,
" neither'program has been underway long enough
to offer conclusive enconomic results, it is anti-
cipated that each will result in a net savings..
Revenues and disposal costs savings are determined
by the market price of materials, disposal £8§ts,
and the volume of materials recovered "—
—^Robert C. Meier, Douglas L. MacLachlan, and Reza Moinpour,
"Resource Recovery Potential from Municipal Waste in an Urban Region,"
University of Washington Graduate School of Business and Aministration,
9:1:121-24, 1975. (Resource Recovery Potential is hereafter referred to as
Meier, et al.
—/ibid., p. 123.
—^Penelope Hansen (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) and James
Ramsey (Resource Planning Association), "Demonstrating Multi-material Source
Separation in Somerville and Marblehead, Massachusetts," February 1976, (MSS
available U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Solid Waste
Management).
-------
38.
The savings fn costs to municipal government would generate additional
revenues to be used in other areas such as energy conservation research and
development — this could create badly needed jobs.
Reservations to recycling may be justified. However, if it were shown
to be beneficial, then source separation would seem encouraging. "Household
diversion of ferrous cans, aluminum cans, reusable bottles, collect (color
sorted glass fragments), and newsprint is estimated to produce materials with
a total market value of $1.62 million per year".^/ This dollar amount is
contingent upon market prices of recyclables at the time this research was
done. Given that market prices do flucuate slightly from time to time, this
shifting, however, would not distort this dollar amount significantly.
Muni ci pa1i ty Benefi t
A cost savings to the municipal government in solid waste management
revenues is conceivable. The actual dollar amount is not available because
the proposed plan has not been tested. However, if the expected 30 percent
(by weight) of the recyclable's waste is excepted from the proposed solid
waste stream, cost savings would be similar to the $2.00 per ton figure stated
previously.
^Muir, et al. p.123.
-------
39.
Ownership rights will be retained by municipal government via the donation
of a long-term land lease (a 20-year lease has been proposed). Retention of
ownership, assuming some alternative method of solid waste disposal is
inevitable, would allow city government an opportunity to experiment with one
alternative disposal method.
Citizen Benefit
J ~ ~"
The economic benefit for each Citizen is directly dependent uponi,
themselves. They^will be paid according to the dollar value of recyclables
advertised. Money payment systems are similar to other projects in Washington
State, i.e. Tacoma and North Seattle.—''
Citizens would enjoy the benefits to their community derived from the
proposed project.
Community Benefit
It is believed that this project has the potential of being self-
sustaining and profit making. Presently, neighborhoods receive payment for
recycling through the municipal government, most often in the form of parks
and playgrounds, as in Somerville. The proposed plan, in addition to helping
the community define for itself what is needed, would also enable that
community, in some degree, to meet its own needs. This concept is unlike any
project investigated and adds a unique perspective to this plan.
-------
40.
Environmental Benefit
Another benefit is to the environment. Landfills are not the most
effective method of solid waste disposal, especially here in Seattle, due to
constant rain. "If you have a lot of rain, a landfill is not much better than
an open dump." Leaching of liquids can get into surrounding groundwater
supplies; this could present serious problems, says EPA aid.—'' "Direct
environmental benefit would accrue for the region from reduced landfill
activity and from the extension of the lives of existing landfill.*—^
Clearly, reduced landfilling would be an outstanding environmental benefit.
Reduced consumption of virgin materials, and the energy required to
convert and transport them would be another benefit. Quantities of natural
resources are dwindling. Carelessness has put a wasteful demand on natural
resources.
"Just 20 years ago almost all soft drink and malt
beverages were packed in refillable containers. About
8 million tons of beverage containers were generated
in the United States in 1973. This represents about
21 percent of all packaged waste and approximately 6
percent of all solid waste generated by commercial
establishments, households, and institutions...In
terms of solid waste generation, if 90 per cent of the
containers bearing a deposit were returned, a decrease
of 70 to 75 percent in the the beverage container
—^Observation, at Tacoma Recycling, Tacoma, Washington, August 5, 1976
and ROB, August 4, 1976.
—^Seattle Post-Intelligence, "Recycling at Home Best EPA Aid", March
23, 1977.
—''iBID. and Meir, et al. p. 124
-------
41.
portion of solid waste would result. This would
reduce waste^generation 5 to 6 million tons per year
nationally."—
The savings in energy would be, "roughly calculated...the energy
equivalent of 500,000 barrels of oil...annually..^ Apparently con-
servation of energy by recycling and reuse of recyclable natural resources
provides an energy savings.
The environment does not seem to be benefiting in any significant manner
from present disposal methods. Recycling of reuseable and remarketable
natural resources benefits the environment through diversion of recyclables
from the present disposal method, saves energy, and decreases the destruction
that landfills may cause.
33/
— U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Proceedings 1975 Conference
on Waste Reduction, Office of Solid Waste Management Programs. (Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1975).
—'fair, et al. p. 124
-------
CONCLUSION
-------
43.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Summary
This report details the creation of a recycling center in a socially and
economically deprived community and evaluates its feasibility.
A proposed organizational structure for the recycling center is provided.
A volunteer Board of Trustees is the administrative segment of the project.
Managers would be responsible to the Board of Trustees for all phases of the
center's operations.
In addition to the economic health of the center, the following were
objectives: a) creation of jobs, b) exception of 30 percent (by weight) of
the recyclable waste from this area's solid waste stream, and c) making
recycling a habit in the proposed area. Achievement of these goals relied
upon three elements:
—adequate equipment to handle collected recyclables
would be required.
—adequate recyclables to accomodate the equipment, and
—monetary compensation for persons who separate and
transport recyclables to the center.
Patrons would receive payment at the Center for their source separated
recyclables. The recyclables would be stored until sufficient quantities are
accumulated, then hauled away for resale.
-------
44.
Several constraints were crucial to the survival of the Center. All
constraints were not overcome but are capable of resolution by the Center's
Trustees.
Community education would be required if the Center is to be success-
ful. Financial and material donations are necessary for the start of the
center.
Evaluation indicated that substantial gains would be available to all
participants, i.e. Municipality, Community, Environment and Citizen.
Conclusion
Indeed recycling of recyclables is a feasible method of solid waste
disposal in socially and economically deprived communities. This report shows
how it is feasible by proposing a viable plan. In addition, the
implementation of a recycling project in the proposed area has already begun,
as indicated herein.
Landfill solid waste disposal was shown to be a wasteful method of
disposal. This method allows not only non-reusable waste to be disposed of,
but reusable waste as well. Dwindling resources, a product of wasteful usage,
has caused a disequilibrium between man and nature. Present disposal methods
do not help bring this equilibrium back into alignment. However, recycling
does.
-------
45.
In a speech to the International Waste Equipment and Technology
Exposition, June 2, 1976, Russell E. Train, former administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency had this to say on source separation.
"We are so far behind that we need to push all
available recovery options. We do not need to
depend on technological approaches only. It may be
that relatively inexpensive and abundant recovery
could be achieved through simple, well-designed
source separation and separate collection
programs. ...in the single State of Viriginia, we
have had three tragic reminders of the price which
must be paid for solid waste mismanagement. The
most serious involved Kepone, a chlorinated
hydrocarbon; the second involves arsenic; the third
concerns the escape of methane gas from a closed
municipal disposal site on which houses were
built. These are but samples of similar incidents
which are apt to occur any place, any5time, as. a
living legacy of past carelessness."—
The Center would aid the community by providing money flow back into the
community, allow the proposed area to define for itself what needs require
addressing in that community and to address them to a limited degree.
An attractive mini-park would be available to be enjoyed. The Center would
stand as a monument of a community working together to help solve a serious
environmental problem.
—^Opinion expressed by Russell E. Train, Administrator, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, in an address (Remarks by the Honorable
Russell E. Train") at International Waste Equipment and Technology
Exposition, June 2, 1976 (Copy on file Office of Public Affairs, U.S. EPA
Region X).
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
-------
REFERENCES
PRIMARY SOURCES
1. Collected Publications
Environmental Protection Agency Conference on Solid Waste. Proceedings 1975
Conference on Waste Reduction, staff of the Office of Solid Waste
Management Programs. Washington: Printing Office, 1975.
SCS Engineers, Incorporated. Analysis of Source Separate Collection of
Rec.yclables Solid Waste-Collection Centers Studies. U.S.Environ-
mental Protection Agency, EPA Document PB-239-776, Report No.
EPA/530/SW-95C. 2, May 27, 1975.
Staff of the Office of Solid Waste Management Program. Third Report Resource
to Congress Resource Recovery and Waste Reduction" U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region X Office of Solid Waste Management, February
1976.
2. Collected Periodicals
Hansen, Penelope, and James Ramsey. Demonstrating Multimaterial Source
Separation in Someryille and Marblehead, Massachusetts, MSS withthe
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region X Office of Solid Waste
Management, February 1976.
Meier, Robert C., Douglas L. MacLachlan, and Reza Moinpour, "Resource Recovery
Potential from Municipal Waste in an Urban Region," University of
Washington Graduate School of Business Administration. 9;1;131-24, 1975.
Presented as a part of the Living Lightly Conference Recycling Workshop,
Seattle. MSS with Recycling Information Service, State of Washington
Department of Ecology.
Report (Draft) on "Source Separation in Somerville and Marblehead,
Massachusetts." MSS with the Environmental Protection Agency
Region X Office of Solid Waste Management, Seattle. Report on source
separation in those areas, March 1, 1976.
The Environmental Action Coalition, Inc., "Trash is Cash" Recycling Program
Manual for the Organization and Management of a Neighborhood Recycling
Program, The Environmental Action Coalition, Inc., EAC Document, 1972.
3. Speech Film Newspaper Interviews Obserations
EPA. MSS U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region X Library, Seattle,
"Recycling of Glass, Paper, and Aluminum Cans," P9132640, November 3,
1976, Computerized Literature Search.
-------
48.
-2-
EPA. "The Village Green" MSS U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of
Public Affairs, 1974. Report on Village Green Recycling Center, (Film).
Dunsire, Charles. "Recycling at Home Best, Says EPA Aid," Seattle Post-. .
Intelligence, March 23, 1977.
Fail, Ken. Personal interview. Seattle, Washington November 22, 1976 and
November 4, 1976.
Mercer Island Recycling Center and Bicentennnial Park, Mercer Island,
Washington August 10, 1976, (OBSV).
Robs Texaco and Recycling, Seattle, Washington, August 4, 1976, (OBSV).
Train, Russell E., "Remarks By The Honorable Russell E. Train", "Address at
the International Waste Equipment and Technology Exposition, June 2,
1976. Copy available U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of
Public Affairs.
Turra, Gene. Personal interview. Seattle, Washington August 4,_J976.
Webb, Orin. Personal interview. Seattle, Washington September 22, 1976.
4. Reference
Tacoma Recycling, Tacoma, Washington, August 5, 1976, (OBSV).
-------
49,
APPENDIX
-------
50.
NEWSPAPER
Fl0%
0 15%
@ Nat. Avg.
CENTRAL SEATTLE RECYCLING PROJECT
STATEMENT OF REVENUE DISTRIBUTION
Revenues
0 .OH
$16,800
$13,440
$13,440
Center
0 1/2
-------
51.
TOTALS
0 30%
-------
52.
SALARIES
TITLE
1
CENTRAL SEATTLE RECYCLING PROJECT
STATEMENT OF SALARIES AND WAGES
Manager
Ass't Manager*
TOTAL
Sal./Hour Sal./Week
$3.75
3.00
W7S
$104.80
91.50
$195.50
Sal ./Month Sal ./Year"-
$416.00 $5,200.00
366.00
$782.00
4,575.00
$9,775.00
WAGES
EMPLOYEES
Waqe/Hour
Waqe/Week
Waqe/Month
Waqe/Year
one3
$2.30
$59.80
$239.20
$2,990.00
two
2.30
59.80
239.20
2,990.00
three4
2.30
52.90
184.00
2,645.00
four
2.30
52.90
184.00
2,645.00
f i ve®
2,30
18.40
73.60
920.00
six
TOTALS
2.30
$13.80
18.40
$262.20
73.60
$993.60
920.00
$13,110.00
1 Calculated at 32 hours work week (71., 7W., 7Th., and 11 Sat.).
Calculated at 30.5 hours work week (6.5 T., 6.5 W., 6.5 Th.
and 11 Sat.).
3Employees 1 & 2 wages are caluclated at 26 hours per week
(5.5 T., 5.5 W., 5.5 Th., and 9.5 Sat.).
^Employees 3 & 4 wages are calculated at 23 hours per week
(4.5 T., 4.5 W., 4.5 Th., and 9.5 Sat.).
^Employees 5 & 6 wages are calculated at 8 hours per week
(Sat. only).
#A11 yearly calculations are based on a 50 week year.
-------
MAP OR BOUNDARIES
53.
-------
VAUUE MUTRIX
ALUMINUM NEWSPRINT 81 - "ETAL GLASS (CULLET) FINE PAPER STUBBIES
lbs or cases @$.075 / lb , @ $,005 / lb 0 $.005 / lb
------- |