TEST UPLOAD PRESENTATION Waste reduction
-
Upload
massrecycle- -
Category
Documents
-
view
706 -
download
2
description
Transcript of TEST UPLOAD PRESENTATION Waste reduction
Carolyn Dann
MassDEP Municipal Asst Coordinator
Methods, Caveats This is primary research in early stages!!
Information sources include DPW reports wherever possible (FY). Otherwise, sources are Recycling Data Sheets (CY)
Main weakness is # households served! Some have been carefully computed; others have not.
Please review your own data, request LA4 form from Assessor’s office and provide me with corrections as needed.
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 2
Definitions and Range of Options• Education and Outreach • WBE= Waste Ban Enforcement • WBE + MREC (Municipal Recycling Enforcement Coor.)• 3-bag or 4-bag limit• SSR (without wheeled carts)• SSR only (with carts) or RecycleBank only • Automated SW (64-g) • WRP, one bag limit, or 39-g barrel automated collection• PAYT (with stickers)• PAYT (bags, fee for all trash)• SSR + Automated SW collection (64-g carts)• SSR + PAYT or Automated SW collection (<40-g carts)
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 3
Waste Ban Enforcement• Definition:
– Hauler is required to leave behind any “visible recyclables” (hopefully with a sticker but not always).
– Requires DPW and Selectmen/City Council support
• Examples and impact on Tons of SW per household served – North Andover (2/2005, 1.35 -> 1.2, down 12%)– Andover (5/2005, 1.4 -> 1.3, down 7%)– Chelmsford (2/2006, 1.14 -> 1.0, down 12%– Tewksbury (9/2008, 1.48 -> 1.35, down 10%)– Billerica (10/2007, 1.54 -> 1.36, down 13%)– Lexington (9/2007, 0.82 -> 0.81, down 2%)
• Conclusion: Impact on SW = 5-13% if T/hh > 1.0• If T/hh < 1.0, then reduction less significant
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 4
MREC = Municipal Recycling Enforcement Coordinator• Either existing staff or DEP grant-funded staff
• FY09 Grants given to: Billerica, Chelmsford, Tewksbury, Springfield, and Lynn
• May/June 2009 vs 2008 Results:
– Billerica – SW down 8%
– Chelmsford – SW down 7%
– Tewksbury – SW down 11%
– Waltham down 3% without a MREC or any changes
• Conclusion: 7-11% impact on tonnage depending on starting point.
• Note: This can be enough to pay for coordinator’s salaryPrepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 5
3- or 4-Bag Limit• Definition: Households limited to 3 or 4 bags or barrels per
week curbside.
• Examples:
– Mansfield (FY07) reduced SW 15% from 1.3 to 1.1 T/hh
– Tyngsborough (FY07) reduced SW 5% from 1.06 to 1.0 T/hh
– Framingham (FY08) reduced SW 4% from 1.04 to 1.01 T/hh
• Conclusion: 3- or 4-bag limit drops SW to ~1.0T/hh
• Real enforcement is KEY!
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 6
Automated SW (64-g barrels)• Truck with mechanical arm, residents receive free barrel, pay for
2nd barrel or overflow bags
• Examples from first 7 months:
– Billerica reduced SW 23% from 1.26 T/hh to 1.02
– Burlington reduced SW 27% from 1.24 T/hh to 0.84 (+ weekly R)
– Tewksbury reduced SW from 1.34 T/hh to 1.0 T/hh (added condos)
– Tyngsborough reduced SW 13% from 0.93 to 0.86
– Lowell reduced SW 25% in first 12 mos, down from 1.46
• Conclusion #1: Starting Point Matters; Brings SW down to ~0.9 to 1.0 T/hh;
• Conclusion #2: Smaller barrels would bring SW down more.
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 7
Barrel Size Matters
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
To
ns p
er
year
Springfield SW Tonnage 1994-2004, using 96-g Barrels
Auto and Semi-Auto
Manual Rubbish
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 8
Single-Stream Recycling (SSR) w/o Carts• Residents use own containers but can mix fiber and
containers (“zero sort”)
• Examples:
– Braintree: SW down 5% from 1.36 to 1.29
– N. Andover (weekly): SW down 6% from 1.13 to 1.06
– Westford (some carts): SW down 2% from 1.22 to 1.2
– Framingham: SW down 8% over 2 yrs with SSR and 3-bag limit from 1.04 to 0.97
– Quincy: SW down 7% from 0.87 to 0.82
– Weymouth: SW down 5% from 1.15 to 1.10
• Conclusion: SSR alone will reduce SW 5-7%Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 9
Single-Stream Recycling With Carts Residents receive standardized cart, collected with
automated truck, “zero sort”
Examples:
Boston: SW down 15% over 3 years from 0.8 to 0.67
Conclusion: More impact when combined with SW limits, PAYT, or dedicated carts for SW.
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 10
RecycleBank Residents receive a recycling barrel and earn coupons
based on the weight of recyclables collected
On a individual household basis
On a route basis
On a community-wide average basis
Results – Info not yet available on City-wide basis
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 11
Waste Reduction Program, Basic Service PAYT, One “Free” Barrel Residents allowed first barrel (up to 36-g), have to buy
bag for extra trash at ~$2/bag
Examples:
Hamilton: SW down 32% from 0.96 to 0.71 T/hh in first 12 months
Wenham: SW down 25% from 0.98 to 0.73 T/hh
Longmeadow: SW down 24% from 0.91 to 0.69 T/hh
Conclusion: WRP reduces SW to 0.7-0.8 T/hh
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 12
Full PAYT Residents pay for every bag of trash or use a sticker on
each bag of trash
Examples: Natick: PAYT since FY04, FY08 SW was at 0.70
Malden – SW down 50% after 1 year from 1.21 to 0.58 T/hh
Gloucester – SW down 25% in first 9 mos, from 0.69 with sticker-PAYT to a projected 0.52 T/hh with bag-PAYT
Shrewsbury – down 39% from 1.10 to 0.68 T/hh
Worcester – PAYT for many years, CY07 was 0.48! (w/o BW)
Conclusion: Full PAYT reduces SW to 0.5-0.7 T/hh;
Bags significantly more effective than stickers.
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 13
SS-R+Automated SW Collection or PAYT• Residents receive 2 barrels: one for SW, one for recycling, “Zero sort”
• Examples:– Holden (96-g R, 64-g SW) : reduced from 1.14 in CY06 to 0.81 in FY08
– Ashland (SSR+PAYT): SW down 38% from 0.96 to 0.6
– Newton (Automated SW+Automated SS-R): Piloted Oct ‘08-Jan ‘09; Started City-wide in October ‘09. Early results: Oct + Nov ’07 = 4726
Oct +Nov ’08 = 4000, 15% less than pre-pilot.
Oct + Nov ’09 = 3379, 16% less than last year, (but Sept was 7% less). Comparing to ‘07, SW is 29% less.
T/hh was 0.93 and could get to 0.79 if SW drops 15% all year.
– North Attleborough (SSR&PAYT): SW down to 0.54 T/hh
• Conclusion: SS-R + Automation/PAYT can reduce SW to 0.6- 0.8
• Results will depend on size of SW barrel.
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 14
Mansfield’s Variety Approach3-Barrel Limit -> SW down 12%, from 1.3 to 1.1
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
Jul-98 Jul-99 Jul-00 Jul-01 Jul-02 Jul-03 Jul-04 Jul-05 Jul-06 Jul-07 Jul-08
FY99
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
Started 3-barrel limit
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 15
FY08 Had Automated SW (64-g)SW Down Another 19% from 1.1 to 0.9
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
Jul-98 Jul-99 Jul-00 Jul-01 Jul-02 Jul-03 Jul-04 Jul-05 Jul-06 Jul-07 Jul-08
FY99
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
April '07 Started Automated SW
Started 3-barrel limit
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 16
Added SS-RecyclingSW Down Another 8%, from 0.9 to 0.8
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
Jul-98 Jul-99 Jul-00 Jul-01 Jul-02 Jul-03 Jul-04 Jul-05 Jul-06 Jul-07 Jul-08
FY99
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
April '07 Started Automated SW
Started 3-barrel limit
July '08 Started SS-Recycling
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 17
Preliminary Conclusions Starting point matters - Always ask about “before”!
More reduction predicted if >1.0 Ton/household
Program matters
5-10% reduction possible with EWBE, MREC, 3-4 bag/barrel limit, SS-R only
25-35% reduction with WRP, Automated SW*
35-50% reduction with PAYT, Automated SW&SSR*
*Barrel size matters!
0-10% reduction if 1.0 T/hh or less, with Automated SW w 64-g barrels
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 18
Next Steps Hear from Boston, Hamilton, Lowell, Malden, North
Attleborough
Test future results against the “preliminary conclusions”
Improve quality of data for # of Households served
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 19
Boston: Semi-automated Single-Stream Recycling Start Date: 7/1/09
Program details:
64-g barrel for each household 1 cart for buildings with 1 to 3 units
2 carts for buildings wit 4 and 5 units
3 carts for 6 units
7+ unit buildings owners are required by law to provide wheeled-carts (100,000 0f the total 300,000)
weekly recycling
Total households served = 300,000
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 20
Boston: Getting to “Change” No change to collection cost; hauler chose to extend
contract
Pilot program
DEP grant
Cart donations from cart vendors
5 pilots over 2 years showed significant increase in R tons
Residents’ positive response
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 21
Boston: Implementation LessonsDelivery Better Formula: 1 cart for single-family; 2 carts for 2 to 4-
unit residences; 3 carts for 5 and 6-unit residences
Record serial numbers
Publicity Mailings, ads, video, cart itself, cart lid graphic
Collection
Anticipate longer collection initially
For crowded streets, residents to put cart on street between parked cars to give recycling truck driver access to cart
Other options - old trash barrel with lid and sticker, old recycling bin, clear plastic bagPrepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 22
Boston: Impact on SW“Before” (FY06 and FY07)SW =~0.8 tons SW per household
“After” (FY09) SW Total =0.72 T/hh/y in FY09
0.67 T/hh/y projected for FY10
15% reduction in SW and 56% increase in R comparing FY10 to FY07
166,336 165,475158,169
149,516143,847
134,740
12,052 11,898 11,058 12,581 13,753 17,202
FY05 FY06 FY07 = "before"
FY08 w SS pilot
FY09 w SS pilots
FY10 w SSR citywide
Boston's SW & R History300,000 households
SW Tons R Tons
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 23
Lowell: Automated SW Start Date: 3/2/09
‘Hybrid’ UBP Program details:
Annual fee of $125/year per household
68-gal wheeled-cart provided for SW for each household
Seniors eligible for 35-gal cart (for discounted price)
weekly dual-stream curbside recycling
serves single to 4-family, ‘owner-occupied’ 5- and 6-family & residential portion of ‘mixed-use’
25,000 households served
35-gal (PAYT) draw-string ‘overflow’ trash bagPrepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 24
Lowell: Getting to “Change” Hauler offered to re-negotiate (1 yr early) if switched to
automation
4 Surrounding communities already committed
Manager publicized urgent need to stem financial losses in SW program
Preparatory steps… wrote new ordinances
Plenty of outreach
Included City Council in decisions, field trips to Nashua and Worcester
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 25
Lowell: Implementation LessonsWork on Assessor’s [eligibility/distribution] list
Start early: six to eight months necessary
Outreach!
Parades, football games, sandwich boards
Markets, festivals, flyers, electric sign boards
Website, hotline
Clearly designate one Dept. to handle inquiries.
Assign extra staff for 1 wk before & 2 after
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 26
Lowell: Impact on SW“Before” (3-08 to 2-09)
“After” (3-09 to 2-10)
SW Total = 40,000
1.6 tons per household
SW Total = 29,000
1.1 tons per household
27.5% reduction in SW
$715,000 saved in tip fees
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
Jan-0
3
Jan-0
4
Jan-0
5
Jan-0
6
Jan-0
7
Jan-0
8
Jan-0
9
Ja
n-1
0
Lowell SW Tonnage12-m rolling totals
CY03 CY04
CY05 CY06
CY07 CY08
CY09 CY10
New Barrel Program
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 27
Hamilton: Waste Reduction Prgm Start Date: 5/18/08
Program details:
Each household can use own <36-g barrel for trash “free”
Bi-weekly recycling
33-gallon overflow bag costs $1.75
Serves all housing units
Total households served = 2460
Same hauler for trash and recycling, no change in contract
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 28
Hamilton: Getting to “Change” League of Women Voters study in FY07 re PAYT
Waste Ban Enforcement in FY08
Support from Town Administrator and Selectmen
Town counsel saw a need for Town Meeting vote
Recycling Committee conducted outreach:
Public meeting
Cable, email, website, outreach to groups
Coordinated presentations at Town Meeting
Selectmen then affirmed by voting to set bag fee at $1.75
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 29
Hamilton: Implementation Lessons No DPW Director during transition
Constant contact with hauler
Businesses, churches – provided individualized help
Hotline - high touch approach, relief for DPW staff
Residents – free in-home coaching
Barrel stickers - provided for shared driveways and multi-families, all residents notified
Outreach by signs, email, cable, hotline, neighbors, news articles, mailed flyers to all
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 30
Hamilton: Impact on SW“Before” (4-07 to 3-08)
• SW Total = 2733
• 1.04 tons per household
“After” (4-08 to 3-09)• SW Total = 1856
• 0.71 Tons per household
• 32% reduction in SW -
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
Hamilton Solid Waste Tonnage12-m rolling totals
Waste Ban
Enforcement
started 4-07
Waste Reduction
Program started 3-08
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 31
Malden: Pay As You Throw
Start Date: 10/6/08 Program details:
All trash must be in blue bag, one free bulky item / week 33-gallon bag costs $2.00 each 15-gallon bag costs $1.00 each
Weekly curbside and drop off recycling Serves all housing units with 6 units or fewer Total households served = 17,783 Population = 56,000 City contracts w/JRM Hauling for trash and recycling
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 32
Malden: Getting to “Change” For the Mayor of Malden, it was all about
balancing the City’s $130 million dollar budget and avoiding avoiding substantial program and personnel cuts.
In putting together his FY09 budget, Mayor Howard included a residential PAYT program citing an estimated $2.5 million dollars could be freed up - from disposal cost savings and revenue from the sale of PAYT bags.
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 33
Malden: Implementation Lessons The City over-estimated average # of large bags per
week per household, and introduced a small bag 3 months into the program, so projected bag revenues were down. On the plus side, the savings from cost avoidance for disposal was way up.
Were the City to do it all over again, they would have bag vendor manage all retailer invoicing / collections. Now, larger retailers remit payment to the City for bags. As a result, the City needs to keep their bag vendor appraised of delinquent retailers.
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 34
Malden: Lessons Continued Be flexible in the first few weeks of program.
The outcry from not involving the public from the beginning has been challenging, but would have certainly slowed, if not, jeopardized implementation.
Need larger recycling containers with even larger recycling decals (and change wording from co-mingled to containers or bottles and cans to make clearer).
Anticipate and make provision for language and cultural obstacles.
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 35
Malden: Impact on SW
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Before After
SW
R
“Before” (10-07 to 9-08)SW Total = 20,750
•1.17 tons per household
“After” (10-08 to 9-09)•SW Total = 10,428
•0.59 Tons per household
•50% reduction in SW
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 36
N.Attleborough: PAYT + SS-R Start Date: PAYT – September 1998
SSR – July 2008 Program details:
– Annual flat fee covers all fixed program expenses. All trash must be in a town bag or have appropriate tag.
33-gallon bags cost $1.50/ea · 15-gallon bags cost $1.00/ea
Bag tags cost $3.00/ea · Bulky tags cost $2.50/ea
Weekly recycling beginning in 1998
Changed to SS-R July 2008
Serves all residential dwellings with 4 units or less
Total households served in 2009 = 8,027
Population = 26,900 in 2009
Same hauler for trash and recycling
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 37
N. Attleborough: Getting to “Change” 1998 the landfill was capped and closed.
Committee negotiating the new contract was motivated to reduce trash and increase recycling.
New hauler contract included a clause – each year the total tonnage was less than 6,020, the town would receive a reduction in the annual bill. $5,500 for every 86 tons less than the 6,020.
Disposal costs combined with collection.
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 38
N.Attleborough: SS-R Implementation Lessons Begin distributing carts at least three weeks before
switching to new system.
Assign carts to addresses by number and record for future use.
Carts are included in contract price and owned by hauler.
Revenue share on recycling.
Investigate clear (see through) carts and/or lids.
Focus on education and outreach - attend school orientation nights, PTA and Town meetings with demonstration materials.
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 39
N. Attleborough: Impact on SW “Before PAYT” (FY98)
6,735 tons SW per year = 0.94 T/hh
“After PAYT” (FY99)
4,732 tons SW per year = 0.66 T/hh
30% reduction in SW
“With PAYT, Before SSR” (FY08)
5,475 tons SW per year = 0.69 T/hh
“After PAYT & SSR” (FY09)
4,331 tons SW per year = 0.54 T/hh
21% additional reduction in SW
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
FY98 "before PAYT"
FY99 "after PAYT"
FY08 "PAYT but before SS-
R"
FY09 "after
PAYT and SSR"
N. Attleborough SW History
in Tons/HH served/Year
Prepared by Carolyn Dann4/06/2010 40