Sustainable Innovation

The National Recycling Coalition (NRC), based in Washington, held its 27^th Annual Congress & Expo Sept. 21-24 in Pittsburgh, "America’s most livable city." The event, which drew more than 1,000 attendees, was held at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center, the largest Gold LEED certified building in the United States. The convention center was a fitting location for the conference theme, "Innovation and Our Sustainable Future."

The conference featured nearly 40 educational sessions, divided among a number of tracks, including policy, management, technology and education, with sustainability and innovation being a key focus.

When traditional markets are at capacity or inaccessible, recyclers must be innovative and look for new outlets for their materials.

"Things like metal and paper have pretty much taken care of themselves," said Timothy Breneisen of the Pennsylvania Recycling Markets Center of Middletown, Pa., who addressed attendees at a session titled "New Uses for Traditional Material: Promoting Recycling Market Development." Breneisen said other materials, such as triple-mix glass and tires, can be more problematic when it comes to finding end markets if traditional uses are not available.

"Obviously, the best use for glass is back into another container," said Robert Bylone, also of the Pennsylvania Recycling Markets Center. However, if recyclers do not have cost-efficient access to container end markets, they do have reasonable alternatives to consider. Bylone discussed the use of recycled glass as a blasting agent as a possible end market for the material. Recycled glass could be used as a substitute for slag or sand in blasting applications, he said. Unlike the container market, using glass as a blasting abrasive involved no color restrictions, Bylone said. In addition, the material could be used at lower operating pressures than its virgin counterparts, which could lead to lower operating costs for end users.

Breneisen added that triple-mix glass also could be used in the construction of on-lot septic systems as an alternative to sand or aggregate. Each system used approximately 150 tons of aggregate material, he said. Recycled glass can actually be a preferable alternative because it is a more uniform material and does not clump. He added that triple-mix glass could cost up to 67 percent less than natural sand in some regions.

Tire recyclers are often faced with the need to expand market development for their material, according to Michael Blumenthal of the Rubber Manufacturers Association (RMA), Washington. While tire-derived fuel (TDF) and civil engineering were more common applications for recycled rubber, Blumenthal said ground tire rubber applications were among the highest value. He added that these markets were also expanding at rates of 15 percent to 20 percent per year.

This material was often used for artificial turf and playground surfaces, Blumenthal said. However, questions had been raised concerning possible toxicity, which had made marketing the material challenging, he added. "Perception can become reality, and a lot of concerns are being raised," he said. According to Blumenthal, while studies had shown the material was safe, its use had been impacted by allegations of hazards. Providing accurate information was key in developing the market, he added. "Everybody wants tires to go to the higher-end markets," he said. "Information is key to success, and risk communication is critical."

Communicating information also is key to advancing successful recycling programs, and a second session during the NRC focused on doing just that.

Representatives from Washington and New York City shared results from studies of their waste management and recycling programs and how those studies helped them better understand recycling opportunities in their cities.

In 2007, Washington’s Department of Public Works embarked on a waste study to determine how much of its waste stream was recyclable. "We’d had enough of everyone telling us 50 to 60 percent of what you collect is recyclable," said Hallie Clemm, deputy administrator of the department’s division of Solid Waste Management, who discussed the case study. "We decided to test that."

In 2007, the department collected 133,000 tons of solid waste and 24,380 tons of recyclables, according to Clemm. The department conducted a waste sort of both solid waste samples and recyclables to help determine the makeup of both streams. Clemm said officials had hoped the results would help determine if the department should expand the recycling program and provide guidance on how to tailor the marketing message to encourage more recycling.

The sort showed there was an additional 23,800 tons of recyclable material still being thrown away, Clemm said. She added that two-thirds of what was still being thrown away was paper. "Diversion rate is not the only metric that matters," she said. "Capture rate is also key."

As a result, the city found it needed to capture more of existing program recyclables—which included newspaper, OCC (old corrugated containers), mixed paper, glass, plastic bottles and aluminum and steel cans—and look to expand the program as well.

Natalie Starr and Ted Siegler of DSM Environmental Services Inc., Windsor, Vt., also introduced attendees to a study the company performed on recycling and waste management costs in New York. The two-year analysis of the Department of Sanitation helped address a persistent argument that recycling is more expensive than disposal, Siegler said.

New York City employs a dual-stream collection system. In areas with an extremely dense population, separate single compartment trucks are devoted to collecting one kind of recyclable. In less-dense areas, dual-compartment trucks collect paper and containers.

DSM found that the sanitation department lumped certain recycling costs together, which threw off comparisons between the cost of recycling vs. the cost of refuse collection, according to Starr. She said, for instance, the city lumped the costs of Freon removal from curbside appliance collection and the composting program at Riker’s Island in with curbside recycling costs. The city also included snow and ice removal costs with recycling because refuse vehicles are used for snow removal as well.

The company found ways to reallocate some costs to arrive at a purer comparison and found that the cost per ton to recycle was very close to that of refuse collection: $284 per ton vs. $267 per ton. Furthermore, as costs to export the city’s waste increased, the difference would continue to shrink, Starr said.

Recycling away from home has traditionally proved challenging for recycling coordinators and facility managers, but a number of speakers shared their successes in this area during an NRC conference panel titled "Away from Home."

A few recycling coordinators and facility managers have managed to successfully address the challenges associated with recovering recyclables consumed away from home at festivals and football games, and even at bars and restaurants.

A panel of speakers that included Al Matyasovsky, supervisor, Central Support Services, Penn State University, University Park, Pa.; Rick Meyers, the recycling manager for the city of Milwaukee Department of Public Works; and Scott Mouw of the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Raleigh, N.C., provided examples of away-from-home recycling successes.

While Matyasovsky successfully initiated a recycling program beginning in 1995 at Penn State’s football stadium, he said the program was not without its problems. For instance, the later in the evening games were, the less material the fans tended to recover for recycling.

Time is often the best teacher, and Matyasovsky said he recognized that the stadium gate and perimeter areas were in need of extra attention during the games. While the program includes those areas now, he said they were all but ignored when the program began in 1995.

Based on his experience, Matyasovsky said he would have involved Penn State students earlier in the process in addition to seeking other funding opportunities.

Meyers outlined his success in developing a recycling program for Milwaukee’s Summerfest, an 11-day music festival. Prior to 2006, the venue only recovered cardboard for recycling. In 2006 the program was expanded to include beverage containers. Meyers said three-quarters of beverages were dispensed in plastic cups, but plastic bottles were a steadily growing part of the waste stream.

In developing the program, Meyers met with the venue’s facilities and grounds management staff to examine the waste items generated as well as waste reduction opportunities. The meetings were held well in advance of the event and included collaboration with other stakeholders, such as waste haulers and nonprofit community groups, he said. To ensure success during Summerfest, Meyers started with a small pilot project to work out any issues.

Clearstream containers from ClearTainer, Palos Heights, Ill., were used to collect recyclables because Meyers said he wanted them to be clearly distinguishable from garbage receptacles. "It works well to use see-through containers at public events because they provide a clear cue," Meyers said. "Most people don’t read signs." The Clearstream containers also used restrictive openings to discourage trash disposal.

Meyers said contamination was relatively low, with a 95 percent purity rate for the collected items.

Before embarking on such a project, Meyers advised ensuring local markets were available for the items collected.

North Carolina’s Mouw discussed the ABC Container Recycling law in the state, which mandates recycling at establishments that hold liquor licenses. The North Carolina General Assembly passed a measure in March of 2005 that required holders of certain Alcoholic Beverage Commission (ABC) permits to implement a program to separate, store and recycle beverage containers generated at their establishments. Businesses holding ABC permits for on-premises malt beverage, on-premises unfortified wine, on-premises fortified wine and mixed beverage permits were affected.

"I’m shocked we got this law through," Mouw said of the ABC Container Recycling law. He credited the state’s ability to make a case for economic development and job creation through recycling as the primary reason the regulation was passed.

The law, which went into effect Jan. 1, 2008, took an establishment’s access to recycling facilities into account, Mouw said, and violations did not led to a revocation of the establishment’s liquor license.

Local markets already existed for the plastic and glass bottles and aluminum cans collected through the program, Mouw said. The area is home to three glass plants that were hungry for clean cullet, he added.

While major haulers were slow to get onboard with the program, according to Mouw, they contracted with small local haulers, realizing the business development the state predicted.

The program has helped to recover 33,000 tons of containers, with 50,000 tons expected before year end. "It took a lot of work to get there," Mouw said. "Every ton is a hard ton to get."

The 2008 National Recycling Coalition Recycling Congress was Sept. 22-24 in Pittsburgh at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center. The 2009 event will be Oct. 4-7 in Portland, Ore.

The authors are associate and managing editor of Recycling Today and can be contacted at jgubeno@gie.net and dtoto@gie.net.