An interesting note from Attorney General Martha Coakley’s blog about the link between single stream recycling programs (all your recyclables go in one bin) and participation rates. According to Coakley, who cites the Mass Department of Environmental Protection, switching to a single stream program can increase the number of households participating by 50% (this based on a pilot study in Boston neighborhoods). Currently, 30 communities in the Bay State have implemented single stream programs, with the City of Boston the latest entrant. The City expects to save $1m this year by switching to single stream recycling. I’m not sure if Belmont has or is considering this option…anybody out there in the B2 community with info on whether this is under consideration, please comment or e-mail!
Citizen Powered Journalism In The Town Of Homes
When I lived in Montreal, this is how it was done, and it is much, much easier. The problem in Belmont is that recycling is only every 2 weeks, and there is no way that the current bins could accommodate everything – they aren't really adequate for the split recycling situation as it is.
When I lived in Montreal, this is how it was done, and it is much, much easier. The problem in Belmont is that recycling is only every 2 weeks, and there is no way that the current bins could accommodate everything – they aren't really adequate for the split recycling situation as it is.
Paul,
I hope they do. I handle the recycling at home and it has gotten ridiculous that I have to spend an hour a week working out what goes where. I am up to 3 and sometimes 4 bins but I see others with 4 bins plus.
Make it simpler and increase participation sounds like a Win/Win.
I don't mind separating paper from the rest, but I do agree that we as a community recycle a lot and are overflowing by week 2! I recognie that money is tight though and this may not be the time to ask for more pick ups, unless we somehow could make money by picking up more frequently- does anyone know if that might be true??
Hi Paul,
Single stream is one of the options we are considering for Belmont going forward. Please note that this post is in my personal capacity, and doesn't represent the opinions of the Belmont Solid Waste and Recycling Advisory Committee.
The issue is more complicated than the simple “use single-stream save money” that Coakley presents though. First, there are some switching costs: the town needs to buy new collection containers, and the haulers need to have trucks that can handle the new carts. These costs ultimately flow through to bid prices. There is also some evidence that a main driver behind better recycling numbers from single-stream is the new carts: it is easier, bigger, and more convenient for people to use than the smaller bins, and so they divert more.
A second issue is diversion volume versus diversion quality. While diversion rates rise, the quality of diverted material tends to decline. There are more contaminants put into the mix, and more of cross-contamination among the recyclable stream. This, and the fact that there are more materials mixed together, means that the single stream processes also require more processing at the Materials Recycling Facilities (MRFs). As a result, the tip fees at the MRFs are lower for single stream communities than for separated recyclable streams like Belmont has now. This could change if the automated sort technologies improve, but for the time being, the higher tip fees on single stream eventually work their way through to the pricing of hauling contracts, also eroding the gains from increased material diversion. It would be interesting to know how Boston is estimating its $1 million savings, and how sensitive realizing those savings is to input assumptions or to existing contractual arrangements that will, of course, change once they implement single stream.
The MRFs have been pushing single stream fairly heavily. In fact, Belmont may be forced in this direction whether or not we wish, simply because all outlets will have moved that way. But the MRFs may well be pushing the change because it gives them higher margins, rather than because it is better for the towns.
Clearly, we want to see Belmont recycle more. It is better environmentally and it saves the town money. But we will evaluate a range of options in deciding how to get there. In the interim, if you see your neighbors putting out nothing on recycling day, you might (very politely, of course) ask them why. That feedback can be quite useful to us as we try to map out the best ways to boost participation rates. Is it they don't understand the program? That they find the program inconvenient in certain respects? That they don't realize it saves the town money? Let us know.
Doug
I'm curious, is it the single stream, or is it the bins? Years ago we noticed that some neighbors put all their non-paper recycling in a trash can with a painted “cans” sign on it, and that worked for them, so we do he same with a big green trash can with a recycling logo painted on it. One big can is easier than 3-4 bins, and the paper just goes out in grocery sacks.
Hey Doug! Thanks for writing and a very informative response [and I should add that I'm responding in my capacity as editor of BloggingBelmont, not as a School Committee member.
] I'm not sure where Boston's figures came from and they could well miss other costs that would go along with the shift to single stream. As others have said: the problem with many, small bins is considerable. In our house, we have one dedicated to paper and two for plastic, tin, etc. We flatten cardboard. Even then, the bins are mostly filled with recycling by about 8-10 days into the 14 day recycling period (there are five of us, after all) and I need to get down on hands and knees and sort and such so its not just a big pile of overflowing trash. But, given that I often stick stuff in there that I'm not absolutely positive is recyclable (Styrofoam, different plastic types), I've wondered what the back end sorting costs are to Belmont and how best to get a quality stream of recycled goods. I can see that single stream would make that more difficult. I know that in other countries (Germany) they have neighborhood drop offs with separate bins for glass (different colors), cardboard, plastic, paper, etc. Neighborhood drop offs wouldn't work here and I can see that they'd probably discourage participation. I wonder if having bigger, dedicated bins (“Glass, Paper, Tin, etc.”) might make it easier for people to comply?
I'm curious, is it the single stream, or is it the bins? Years ago we noticed that some neighbors put all their non-paper recycling in a trash can with a painted “cans” sign on it, and that worked for them, so we do he same with a big green trash can with a recycling logo painted on it. One big can is easier than 3-4 bins, and the paper just goes out in grocery sacks.
Hey Doug! Thanks for writing and a very informative response [and I should add that I'm responding in my capacity as editor of BloggingBelmont, not as a School Committee member.
] I'm not sure where Boston's figures came from and they could well miss other costs that would go along with the shift to single stream. As others have said: the problem with many, small bins is considerable. In our house, we have one dedicated to paper and two for plastic, tin, etc. We flatten cardboard. Even then, the bins are mostly filled with recycling by about 8-10 days into the 14 day recycling period (there are five of us, after all) and I need to get down on hands and knees and sort and such so its not just a big pile of overflowing trash. But, given that I often stick stuff in there that I'm not absolutely positive is recyclable (Styrofoam, different plastic types), I've wondered what the back end sorting costs are to Belmont and how best to get a quality stream of recycled goods. I can see that single stream would make that more difficult. I know that in other countries (Germany) they have neighborhood drop offs with separate bins for glass (different colors), cardboard, plastic, paper, etc. Neighborhood drop offs wouldn't work here and I can see that they'd probably discourage participation. I wonder if having bigger, dedicated bins (“Glass, Paper, Tin, etc.”) might make it easier for people to comply?