|
Forgive me, dear Eugene-Springfield recyclers, if I sound grumpy about your release from the onerous task of sorting your recyclable discards, now the prospect of dumping all your recycling in one bin is soon to be a reality. I just can_t get that excited about co-mingling. In my opinion, the jury is still out as to whether co-mingling is a step forward or a step back in the bigger picture of resource conservation. Loss of local jobs, a net loss in the amount of material that is actually recycled (as opposed to collected), lower quality recycled commodities and loss of material needed by local manufacturers aren’t exactly results I believe are in the best interests of the community or the environment.
Co-mingling fans cite two principal benefits; lowered collection costs and increased public participation resulting from a no-brainer system. But they don’t add up to the recycling nirvana we’ve been promised. The point of collecting recyclables is to put waste back to work and make efficient use of the raw materials and embodied energy it takes to make those plastic milk jugs, newspapers, cardboard boxes and glass jars in the first place. Co-mingling is the most efficient way to collect recyclables, but it may be the least efficient and most costly method to recover them for future use.
Two factors are at work here; the quality of materials collected at the curb, and how much of the stuff actually ends up being sold into the recycled commodities markets. While a no-sort system may mean more people recycle more stuff, many communities using co-mingled collections have found instead that they just get more trash in those recycling bins. In communities that sort, contamination rates average 1.9%, while co-mingled, or single stream, systems average 4.4%. People like to recycle and will put all kinds of things in recycling bins, usually, but not always, with good intentions. One of the most effective ways to teach consumers what can and cannot be recycled is to leave contaminated and non-recyclable materials at the curb on collection day. Instant feedback has a most salutary effect on quality! Without accountability it remains to be seen whether people will do as good a job. Mixed materials make it hard for the collector to determine whether or not they are contaminated. The automated collection trucks that will soon pick up our recycling mean that incoming material will never be inspected for quality—and quality is |
|
very, very important when it comes to producing recycled materials that can be sold and reused.
There isn’t a facility in Lane County with the capability of sorting large volumes of co-mingled recyclables, so your recycling will be trucked up Interstate 5 to a Materials Recovery Facility or MRF. A series of conveyors, blowers, magnetic separators, balers and human sorters take the river of fibers (paper/cardboard) and containers and sorts, bales and markets them. The effectiveness of a MRF depends on how much marketable material they can produce. What they can’t process, because of contamination or inability to separate out, is known as the “residual”. That residual ends up being dumped as garbage. MRF’s handling co-mingled materials produce an average of 200% more residuals than those handling sorted ones, 4.3% compared to 16.6% according to a 2002 study by Governmental Advisory Associates, Inc. That’s a lot of resources wasted that could have been put back to work. And high residual rates aren’t the only issue that processors of co-mingled streams deal with. The quality of the end products produced is often lower than those that come from partially sorted streams, especially for the valuable paper and other fibers, which make up 75% of the volume, and which local mills depend on for material. Northwest pulp mills that rely on high quality recycled feedstock are already experiencing problems with low quality, contaminated material from co-mingled collections.
Area haulers, who stand to benefit most from the new system, are understandably jazzed by the prospect of greatly increased efficiency on their recycling pickup routes, and who can blame them? They’ll be able to slash their costs by picking up more stuff in less time. Hmm, will we see a rate decrease? But local manufacturers and businesses lose out. Weyerhaeuser reports they have lost hundreds of tons of locally generated cardboard used to make material for new boxes at their Springfield plant. The supply now has to be shipped in from far away, at increased financial and environmental cost. BRING lost a supply of plastic—and revenue—that supported our many education and recycling programs and employed three people. Concerned citizens who care about sustainability and resource conservation should treat claims that co-mingling will result in more stuff being recycled more efficiently with a healthy dose of skepticism. —Julie Daniel
|
|
| LATEST ELECTRONICS ROUNDUP REPORT |
|
|
Three tons! That’s how much lead was in the 1,027 computer monitors and televisions recycled at our May 3rd Electronics Roundup, lead that could have ended up polluting our water and air. Twenty-three businesses and 325 individuals turned in over 30 tons of equipment. For the first time, we charged fees (as opposed to asking for voluntary donations) to recycle every item. |
|
We were heartened that most people understand it costs money to deal with electronics responsibly. Many believed the feesbenefited BRING, which sadly, isn’t the case.Fees covered the $9,290 cost of sending the material to a responsible recycler. Our thanks to the Cities of Eugene and Springfield and Lane County Waste Management for both financial and in-kind support, without which we could not have run this program. Thanks also, to the many community volunteers that staffed the event, and to generous UsedNews readers who contribute money to help finance programs like this. Your donations make a difference!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Used News is a quarterly newsletter published by BRING Recycling, a nonprofit organization serving Lane County since 1971.