I can’t find a link. (If you can, let me know.) But, I recall vividly Mike Striar railing against mandatory curbside recycling in Newton back when it was first being considered. He said (and I’m paraphrasing), “There’s no guarantee that there will continue to be a market for recyclables.”
Fast forward a lot of years. According to this NPR report, the US exports about a 1/3 of its recyclables, half of that going to China. Now, China is shutting its doors to foreign recyclables.
China closing as a market for recyclables isn’t exactly Mike’s no-market scenario. But, it’s now a 1/6 smaller market, which probably means the price Newton’s vendor gets for recyclables will go down, perhaps sharply, which probably means the cost of garbage and recycling collection will go up with the next contract or earlier.
At the very least, it’s something to think about. Maybe do a little more of the first two R’s.
Sean, it’s probably closer to 40% export rate, especially for plastics. There are never any guarantees in life, especially with regards to recycling markets are volatile by nature.
China isn’t completely shutting its doors to recycling imports but it is becoming much more selective. China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) proposed adopting new contamination standards for recyclables of 0.5% which ends up being nearly a ban because its next to impossible standard to meet. Among other things, American recycling facilities will need to invest in new machinery/technology and/or higher staffing levels to improve the job of filtering out materials that don’t belong.
Waste Management is already charging the City higher rates due to higher levels of contamination in the green carts than allowed by our contract. Newton residents need to understand that when they put contaminants in the green recycling carts it costs us all more money.
We need to do more education and outreach to reduce contaminants in the green recycling carts. Here is a link to the website page for information on what to put tin the green cart and what not to put in it: http://www.newtonma.gov/gov/dpw/recycling/recycle_at_the_curb/default.asp
And yes, more than ever we need to reduce and reuse materials. We can’t just recycle our way out of our solid waste disposal problem. Remember, we buy a lot of the products China produces – a lot of it designed for single use. We have the choice not to buy it, or purchase a product designed to be more durable and long lasting.
The silver lining is that this is an opportunity to innovate and encourage domestic recycling markets and opportunities for small businesses. And it’s still makes good sense to recycle rather than incinerate or landfill our unwanted materials.
Of course I opposed MANDATORY curbside recycling. I support voluntary recycling, and I personally recycle everything possible.
I’m tired of watching trash collection be used as a social engineering device by certain City Council members. Why is it that changes the Council makes to trash collection always end up costing more? Here’s a clue from Alison’s above post…
“Waste Management is already charging the City higher rates due to higher levels of contamination in the green carts than allowed by our contract. Newton residents need to understand that when they put contaminants in the green recycling carts it costs us all more money.”
Seems to me like Alison is putting the blame for higher costs on residents [when it belongs on the City Council], and laying the groundwork for mandatory curbside collection of food scraps…
Clearly, the CC did not anticipate the problem with “contaminants” in these green barrels, because they didn’t do their homework. Now they’re lining up a curbside food scraps program without a clue how that will affect the rodent population in village centers, where rats are already a problem.
@Sean– Get next year’s headline ready now… “Mike Striar was right about the rats.”
[Let’s face it, Sean, even if you add the word “sorta” to THAT headline, I’d still be right as rain.
@Mike, this is not about social engineering, it is about economic sustainability, protecting our environment and making the best use of our limited resources. If we only had trash collection and no recycling alternatives we would be paying significantly more. We have had single stream recycling since 2009 and the tipping fees for trash have always been higher than for recycling . Of course we anticipate contaminants (its written into the contract) and we actually do due our homework (the Solid Waste Commission meets every month and we have excellent staff ). However, we all have responsibilities as residents to do our part. I see the CC responsibility to make recycling easy and convenient and save the City money as well. The cost increases we are seeing is because of changes in an international market, not any action by the CC. The standard just got higher and we need to step up.
@Mike, no one is FORCING you to recycle. You have a choice: hire a trash removal service to take your trash away unsorted OR use the City’s low-cost approach. Most residents in Mass aren’t even offered a curbside pickup option. When I lived in Needham we paid for trash pickup from a private hauler and it was quite affordable actually.
Municipal waste and recyclables are commodities subject to price fluctuations. As long as we’re saving money sorting then we should continue to do so.
@Alison– Again, I support recycling efforts. I’ve never been opposed to recycling. Personally, I recycle everything I can…
You mentioned that Waste Management is charging the City more because of food contamination in the green recycling carts. The automated trash collection system [which I never supported] was sold to the public as a cost saver. As you pointed out, it’s actually costing more than the [then] Board of Aldermen anticipated. So when you tell me that something is about “economic viability,” I’m going to remind you that I’ve heard that trash before…
Now you’re getting ready to double-down with a new “pilot program” for curbside garbage that you clearly hope to spread city-wide. You’re already selling this program as a cost saver, and I’m reminding you that the BoA/CC does not have a good track record predicting those things. Additionally, as I’ve mentioned before, I believe it is a mistake to advance the garbage pilot program without first understanding how it will impact the growing rodent problem in Newton’s village centers.
One thing to remember is that our purchasing practices directly impact the environment. Also, holding manufacturers of containers accountable is within our power. The problem can be mitigated at the source. I highly recommend doing searches on “The Five Gyres” and “Life Without Plastic”. Simple supply and demand: when buyers use their considerable clout to refuse to continue to the problem, change will happen. Alternatives are already on the market.