Going with the Flow

If you thought the days of barges piled high with garbage floating along the Hudson River were a thing of the past, think again.

Although solid waste management issues are typically the domain of state and local governments, federal agencies have increased their roles by setting minimum national standards for landfills and incinerators under the Resource Conservation and Recovery and Clean Air Acts. Now, a federal court has ruled that shipments of waste are protected under the Constitution’s interstate commerce clause.

Legislation in some states restricting the interstate transportation of solid waste, known as “flow control,” would have given states the ability to limit the amount of out-of-state waste they accept and to designate where locally generated waste must be disposed.

But federal courts have ruled that states may not prohibit waste shipments, impose special fees on out-of-state waste or restrict where privately collected waste must be disposed. In light of these flow control defeats and the current political environment, things don’t look promising for flow control advocates in the near future.

Many recycling advocates fear that court rulings making the highway to the landfill wider and less expensive will make it difficult for municipal recycling programs to divert greater percentages of municipal solid waste in the future.

A REALISTIC ATTITUDE

Public Information Officer Andy Brigham of the Onondaga County Resource Recovery Agency (OCRRA), North Syracuse, N.Y., says, “There’s always a possibility that federal legislation could be enacted, but from a realistic standpoint, there is no indication that this will be done.” Brigham’s realistic attitude appears to be common.

Marie Krusan, from the Association of New Jersey Recyclers, thinks the prospects for passing flow control legislation won’t improve “unless there is a radical change in the make-up of the democracy.” Others, such as Melanie O’Donnell, president of the New York State Association for Reduction, Reuse and Recycling (NYSARRR), say that flow control has been talked about for so long at the federal level, it is probably never going to be enacted.

Some members of the solid waste management industry consider the languishing of flow control a positive measure. Dennis Vacco, Waste Manage-ment’s Regional Vice President for New York State, hopes that the intensity of the flow control issue has subsided. “We firmly believe in the correctness of the Supreme Court decision that ruled that waste in the interstate stream of commerce is a commodity,” Vacco says. “That decision, quite frankly, has left any potential regulation of interstate movement almost exclusively to Congress.”

Vacco hopes flow control will not receive additional attention at the congressional level any time soon, citing the number of large and small companies that have invested in landfills either across a specific region or throughout various states. “The costs have already been built into the financial structure of the landfill and of the company,” Vacco says, “and it seems more than a bit unfair that after these companies have made substantial investments in these landfills to now change the rules of the trade.”

Anything in Vacco’s estimation that “restricts the open market is detrimental to the end-line consumer. To put it another way,” Vacco says, “flow control will drive up costs.”

A LIMITING MOVE

States such as Pennsylvania and Virginia, which rank first and second among the states that import solid waste according to a report from the Congressional Research Service, may be reconsidering their options.

“Governor Ridge is clear that he’d like something to happen,” John Frederick of the Professional Recyclers of Pennsylvania (PROP), Bellwood, says.

Krusan says, “I think Virginia and Pennsylvania are very clearly looking at imports, and one of the ways to do that is to limit what landfills will do. This is what they are trying to do, but whether or not it passes the muster Constitutionally is another story.”

O’Donnell points to the possible economic conflict that a reluctance to license additional landfills could create. “On the other side of the coin is the issue of waste as private enterprise . . . it’s a tricky question,” O’Donnell says, “because while they don’t want to restrict businesses from doing business in their communities, they still don’t want to be known as a ‘dump.’” Indications are, she adds, that states such as Virginia and Pennsylvania are looking critically at the use of their landfills.

Vacco says limiting the licensing of landfills is definitely a state’s prerogative. But this comes with a caution. “Any state, regardless of whether it’s Massachusetts, Pennsylvania or Virginia, which contemplates slowing down the licensing process, or being much more selective in the amount of acreage that is licensed to be landfilled, the consequence that they need to factor into that decision is the potential upward pressure on price,” Vacco says.

A CONSOLIDATED EFFORT

The consolidation among waste management companies has also had an effect on communities that would like to have a recycling component to their waste management contracts, Krusan says. Mayors often ask Krusan for information on how to write a waste contract, she says, and how to increase the number of bids. “In New Jersey, you’re lucky if you get one person to bid on your contract. And that, people are noticing,” she says. “It’s coming to the politicians’ attention.”

O’Donnell says, “The effect of consolidation is that it gave a few companies a lot of power, and then they could reduce tipping fees in those communities.” These lower tipping fees in the absence of strong recycled commodities markets result in reduced recycling. “Communities are subsidizing those tipping prices with tax dollars from their residents,” O’Donnell says, “so there is less incentive on the waste generators’ part to reduce their waste, because it’s so cheap to get rid of.”

Vacco doesn’t believe that municipalities in New York State are affected to the degree that they claim to be, he says. Despite the municipalities’ claims, “when you get down to the level of the street, and you start observing the number of competitors that we are confronted with, I just don’t buy the claim that municipalities are handcuffed in their efforts to find a competitive price for disposal and for their recyclables,” Vacco says.

Brigham doesn’t blame hauler consolidation for recycling cutbacks either. “It’s simply unfair to say that they are to blame. Flow control is having its impact on solid waste management from coast to coast,” he says.

Waste haulers only recycle in some cases because they feel they have to, Krusan says, and in many cases, they are not concerned about doing it. “Their money is based on disposal, based on putting things into that hole. And they want to fill that hole,” she says, because it is in the haulers’ best interest to do so. “To counter the loss due to flow control, the landfills need as much waste as possible,” Krusan says.

Krusan sees this as the reason why some curbside recyclables are being placed in landfills rather than recycled. The haulers are looking at the economics involved and realizing that recycling is not cost-effective, she says. “Their bottom line is defined by what they put in that hole. If to do that, they need to put recyclables in there, why not? That’s my perception of it,” Krusan says.

O’Donnell shares a similar view. “Any private business that sees that something that they are doing is not cost effective, wants to stop it. That’s just good business. I can’t fault the haulers for that,” she says. “They are not social services. They are not in the business of welfare. They are in the business of making money.”

While recycling is environmentally beneficial, it may cause economic ills for waste haulers. “They are not going to do recycling because it feels good,” O’Donnell says. “It’s not reasonable to expect that. They are going to do what makes the most sense for their company; and that’s what they should be doing. If it doesn’t make sense for their company, and it’s not against the law, then it’s probably not going to get done.”

Frederick is optimistic. “I think that if there is the resolve to recycle in a community, it’s going to get done, whether or not the competitive situation in solid waste has changed. I think the issue that is more at the heart of this is the difficulty recycling has in competing with extremely low landfill [prices]. There aren’t a lot of incentives in places where you can get rid of your trash for $20 a ton,” Frederick says.

AN AID FOR RECYCLING?

O’Donnell says that states can take many steps to encourage recycling. “They don’t have to come out with direct subsidies for recycling programs, but they can help recycling programs with their tax dollars in other ways,” O’Donnell says. Some of the measures she suggests are maintaining laws that favor recycling and granting tax incentives to companies that use recycled materials in the manufacturing process.

Solvay Paperboard in Onondaga County is a good example of a company using recycled materials in the manufacturing process. The company, which has constructed a second mill in the area and has plans for a third, takes OCC and uses it to make new liner board for new corrugated boxes. The jobs created by these companies using recycled feedstock creates an economic benefit that is often overlooked, O’Donnell says.

Frederick says, “I think one of the things that we in Pennsylvania have come to recognize is that there is still a lot to do at the consumption level of this rather complicated issue.” The members of PROP realize that there are many opportunities to use recycled feedstock in industry that have not been taken advantage of, he says. Of course, this option may not always be feasible for technical and economic reasons, Frederick adds.

“I think when you stop to consider the enormous amount of raw materials that American industry uses,” Frederick says, “it is just obvious that there should be lots of opportunities to use recycled feedstock. I think we’re just not capitalizing on those opportunities.”

If you think in terms of the “business” of recycling, the issues of marketing and budgets should come to mind. Krusan says, “We need to think about marketing, just like everybody else. I’m not sure how it will work, but we need to do a better job of telling the public.” She stresses that marketing and education are not one and the same, and that recycling can benefit from branding, just like other products and services do.

However, the surest benefit to recycling programs comes in the form of strong, sustainable commodity prices. “Anything that makes the markets strong, keeps the markets strong, enhances the markets, will help a recycling program,” O’Donnell says. When the commodity markets are strong, the costs of collecting, sorting and transporting the recyclables are offset, increasing the profitability of the program.

“Paper represents about 70% [by weight] of the materials collected in a curbside program,” O’Donnell says. “Overall, the price of paper is what tips the scales in favor of recycling or against recycling when you’re weighing costs.”

Frederick laughs out loud at the thought of trying to predict the viability of commodity markets. “The reason I’m laughing is that after spending nine or 10 years in this business, I don’t think you can make any projections or assumptions whatsoever on commodity prices,” he says. But don’t confuse this skeptical attitude with pessimism. “I think there should be optimism that more capacity is coming on-line in many commodities and that, in a general way, we should be optimistic that commodity prices will sustain themselves at reasonable levels.”

As a waste industry executive, Vacco says he would like to see higher commodity prices. “But, I think that for certain commodities right now, it is a vibrant market,” he adds.

A SUPPORTIVE ATMOSPHERE?

The strength of local government support for recycling can be quite another story, however. “You don’t want to hear about my opinion of the governor’s office,” Krusan says with laughter. Krusan says she does not feel the Association of New Jersey Recyclers has the support of Governor Christine Todd Whitman’s office. “We’ve sent letters to them, we have done editorials, we’ve been on the phone with the governor’s office,” Krusan says. “We want to increase the procurement of recycled products. We want to find some short and long-term funding for recycling. She took money back in ’93 and let the recycling tax fund expire. Right now, we’re seeing a tremendous hurt to recycling. Preliminary reports show that recycling figures are going down in New Jersey,” she says.

“The legislature is sort of a mixed bag right now,” Krusan says. While they agree that measures need to be taken in support of recycling, the measures remain locked in committee, she says. “I’m not particularly pleased with them right now, let’s put it that way,” Krusan says. “I think part of it is that [recycling] is perceived as done and taken care of. But anything that you do has to have constant reinforcement,” she says.

Krusan compares this constant reinforcement of the need and benefits of recycling with a company like Coca-Cola, which spends millions in advertising to maintain its market share. The work shouldn’t stop once the goal has been achieved, she says.

Recycling seems to enjoy more government support in New York State. “My sense of the Pataki administration and the management of the Department of Environmental Conservation under John Cahill is that recycling is a very important issue for the Pataki administration,” Vacco says. “Of course, Pataki is probably one of the most environmentally aware governors that New York State has had in some time. And while he has some folks scratching their heads because he is so ardently concerned about the environment as a Republican. I think he’s done quite a good job at it.”

O’Donnell says, “Both the state’s legislative bodies and governor’s office have said that they are proud of New York’s recycling rate, that this rate is strong and that they are going to maintain it. The problem is, taking a critical look at the state’s recycling law, it’s not strong enough to provide any enforcement penalties [for constituencies that do not meet the recycling goals].”

New York State has mandated recycling through its permitting process, O’Donnell explains. “Whenever it permits a facility, such as a waste-to-energy facility or a landfill, then it requires the municipality that is constructing the waste-to-energy facility or the landfill to meet certain recycling goals,” she says. But, there are no such goals mandating the private sector, she adds. “What we really need is some stronger recycling laws that will provide some enforcement penalties.”

A POSSIBLE CUTBACK?

Lower tipping fees resulting from the transportation of solid waste across state borders can affect the attractiveness of recycling, but will it actually lead to elimination of recycling programs? Krusan says that some towns in New Jersey have stopped curbside collection, but still have recycling depots, so they are technically in compliance with the law.

The City of Amsterdam, N.Y., provides one notable example of the scaling back of recycling programs, O’Donnell says. In November of 1999, city officials voted to suspend recycling in 2000. Although residents were separating their recyclables from their trash, there were also allegations that the private company the City of Amsterdam used for curbside pickup was dumping these recyclables in a landfill, rather than bringing them to a recycling facility. And because the city has no permitted facilities, they were not obligated to meet the 40% recycling goal, she says.

Frederick says that the data for Pennsylvania is encouraging, because it shows a gradual increase in the number of materials collected and the number of communities that participate in recycling. “That is not to say, by any stretch of the imagination, that there aren’t some struggles and that there still aren’t some communities that have scaled things back,” he says. “I have not heard of large scale changes in that regard. It has certainly been discussed, especially when people speak of plastics. The difficulties in collection and processing of plastics can be considerable.” Because of the ever-increasing presence of plastic packaging on store shelves, there is sure to be a large public outcry if plastics were no longer accepted in curbside bins, Frederick says.

In the immediate “post-flow control” era, stronger recyclable commodity prices are helping recycling stay viable in most communities. But whether solid waste districts remain interested in recycling if commodity prices sink and cross-border landfill costs remain low could be the next question to answer in the municipal recycling story. RT

The author is a staff member of Recycling Today.