FW: [GRRN] seeking info on commercial wet/dry programs

Krueger, David (David.Krueger@ci.sj.ca.us)
Fri, 23 Jul 1999 14:26:00 -0700


This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01BED552.81763A9A
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"

To: Eric Lombardi
From: David Krueger
Re: Wet / Dry
----------
From: Krueger, David
To: 'SMTP: brantley@ci.monterey.ca.us'; Young,Michele; Lacaze, Skip;
Foster,Michael; 'SMTP: regertman@aol.com'
Subject: FW: [GRRN] seeking info on commercial wet/dry programs
Date: Friday, July 23, 1999 8:57AM

Hi. My name is David Krueger and I work for the City of San Jose. I am
also a big advocate of wet/dry systems.

You pose an interesting question. I think that the answer is to focus the
users on source reduction. That's the behavior change we really want. If
you combine a wet/dry system with a "pay-as-you-throw" system (charging
users based on the amount of wet and dry materials they set out for
collection) you give them an incentive to practice source reduction.

I think that this type of system moves us up the integrated waste management
heirarchy: With wet/dry, there is no more "garbage" option. Everything is
either a recyclable or a compostable. Charging "pay-as-you-throw" rates
for wet/dry collection reminds users that even recycling and composting are
not free, and that the real goal is to produce less waste in the first
place.

Most of the incentive systems in place today charge users for garbage on a
"pay-as-you-throw" basis, but provide recyclables and yard trimmings
collection for "free." This sends the wrong message to people. They think
its ok to generate tons of waste paper or grass clippings as long as it get
recycled. They are oblivious to the high cost of processing these
materials. Many of them actually believe that the City is breaking even or
making a profit on recyclables collection.

Right now, if people don't recycle or compost, the "default" is disposal.
Wet/dry makes composting and recycling the "default" and leaves source
reduction as the real goal. Users do not have the option of throwing
something in a garbage bin.

With a wet/dry system in place, cities could focus their outreach efforts on
encouraging people to adopt source reduction practices such as backyard
composting, double-sided copying, cloth diapers etc. When users ask "why
should I compost in my back yard if you are going to pick up all the "wet"
and compost it for me anyway" we can answer - "Because you are paying for
"wet" collection by the lb (or gallon). Therefore reducing the amount of
wet materials you set out will reduce your garbage bill."

For businesses, we can emphasize that the potential dollar savings from
source reduction is much greater than the dollar savings from recycling.
If you recycle your white paper, you save a tiny bit on your garbage bill,
and you might get paid a little bit for the paper. If you just use less
white paper in the first place, you still save the same amount on your
garbage bill, and also you save a lot of money because you don't have to
purchase as much paper. It costs a lot more to buy a ream of new paper
than you get for recycling a ream of old paper.

As Eric pointed out, it is also important to get users to purchase and use
those materials that will be recoverable in a wet/dry system. With a
wet/dry system in place, cities can focus outreach on source reduction, the
purchase of materials that are easily recycled, and the purchase of
materials made with recycled content.

By the way, there is a company called Biocorp that makes compostable
"plastic" utensils out of corn. McDonald's in Germany uses these utensils.
Most of the waste from German McDonald's is composted, because it is either
food waste, non-recyclable paper (napkins, etc.) or compostable "plastic"
utensils.

Zero Waste is possible!

Let's continue this dialog on wet/dry!!!

David Krueger
(408) 277-5533
david.krueger@ci.sj.ca.us
----------
From: Lacaze, Skip
To: Krueger, David
Subject: FW: [GRRN] seeking info on commercial wet/dry programs
Date: Thursday, July 22, 1999 6:11PM

FYI
----------
From: Eric Lombardi <
To: Angela BRANTLEY
Subject: Re: [GRRN] seeking info on commercial wet/dry programs
Date: Thursday, July 22, 1999 8:27AM

At 01:34 PM 7/21/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Eric: I have been under the impression that wet/dry collection gives a
mixed message to the users and that recycling does not become part of their
mentality. Any validity to that?
>Angela Brantley
>City of Monterey
>brantley@ci.monterey.ca.us
>

Hi Angela,

I have confronted this issue before, and its interesting.
What do you suppose the problem is ... that wet/dry makes
it too easy? Just throw it in here (dry side) and it will
be sorted out for recycling. The wet side becomes compost.

I believe that increased convenience is the key
to all landfill diversion strategies ... recycling, composting
and buy recycled programs.

The real problem that needs to be faced, for both wet/dry and
conventional systems, is the "garbage in, garbage out" issue.
The crappy plastics that people buy and use everyday need to be
converted into "bio-plastics" which will compost...the end-use
markets need to be mandated to use recycled content, thus driving
up demand ... products need to be designed and made with
recyclability in mind ... and then the public must buy the
"ecological option" off the shelf.

My interest in wet/dry assumes that progress continues to be made
on many other fronts ... most of them more important than the
"end of the pipe" issue (landfills vs recycling) because I think
the upstream issues of resource depletion and ecosystem degradation
are the true problems we need to focus on.

So, assuming we win the battles on these other fronts, then the
inevitable "waste" stream will be full of good stuff, "resources",
ready to be sorted and put back into use. The wet/dry system then
becomes the road to ZeroWaste.

Did this make sense? I know my vision of the future is decades ahead
of today, but thats OK,,, we're talking big changes in the world here!

Eric

------_=_NextPart_001_01BED552.81763A9A
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
FW: [GRRN] seeking info on commercial wet/dry programs

To:  Eric Lombardi
From: David Krueger
Re:  Wet / Dry
 ----------
From: Krueger, David
To: 'SMTP: brantley@ci.monterey.ca.us'; = Young,Michele; Lacaze, Skip; Foster,Michael; 'SMTP: = regertman@aol.com'
Subject: FW: [GRRN] seeking info on commercial = wet/dry programs
Date: Friday, July 23, 1999 8:57AM

Hi.  My name is David Krueger and I work for the = City of San Jose.  I am also a big advocate of wet/dry = systems.

You pose an interesting question.  I think that = the answer is to focus the users on source reduction.  That's the = behavior change we really want.   If you combine a wet/dry = system with a "pay-as-you-throw" system (charging users based = on the amount of wet and dry materials they set out for collection) you = give them an incentive to practice source reduction.

I think that this type of system moves us up the = integrated waste management heirarchy:  With wet/dry, there is no = more "garbage" option.  Everything is either a = recyclable or a compostable.   Charging = "pay-as-you-throw" rates for wet/dry collection reminds users = that even recycling and composting are not free, and that the real goal = is to produce less waste in the first place.

 Most of the incentive systems in place today = charge users for garbage on a "pay-as-you-throw" basis, but = provide recyclables and yard trimmings collection for = "free."  This sends the wrong message to people.  = They think its ok to generate tons of waste paper or grass clippings as = long as it get recycled.  They are oblivious to the high cost of = processing these materials.  Many of them actually believe that = the City is breaking even or making a profit on recyclables = collection.

Right now, if people don't recycle or compost, the = "default" is disposal.  Wet/dry makes composting and = recycling the "default" and leaves source reduction as the = real goal.    Users do not have the option of throwing = something in a garbage bin.

With a wet/dry system in place, cities could focus = their outreach efforts on encouraging people to adopt source reduction = practices such as backyard composting, double-sided copying, cloth = diapers etc.    When users ask "why should I = compost in my back yard if you are going to pick up all the = "wet" and compost it for me anyway"  we can answer = - "Because you are paying for "wet" collection by the lb = (or gallon).  Therefore reducing the amount of wet materials you = set out will reduce your garbage bill."

For businesses, we can emphasize that the potential = dollar savings from source reduction is much greater than the dollar = savings from recycling.   If you recycle your white paper, = you save a tiny bit on your garbage bill, and you might get paid a = little bit for the paper.   If you just use less white paper = in the first place, you still save the same amount on your garbage = bill, and also  you save a lot of money because you don't have to = purchase as much paper.   It costs a lot more to buy a ream = of new paper than you get for recycling a ream of old paper.

As Eric pointed out, it is also important to get = users to purchase and use those materials that will be recoverable in a = wet/dry system.   With a wet/dry system in place, cities can = focus outreach on source reduction, the purchase of materials that are = easily recycled, and the purchase of materials made with recycled = content.

By the way, there is a company called Biocorp that = makes compostable "plastic" utensils out of corn.   = McDonald's in Germany uses these utensils.  Most of the waste from = German McDonald's is composted, because it is either food waste, = non-recyclable paper (napkins, etc.) or compostable "plastic" = utensils.

Zero Waste is possible!

Let's continue this dialog on wet/dry!!!

David Krueger
(408) 277-5533
david.krueger@ci.sj.ca.us
 ----------
From: Lacaze, Skip
To: Krueger, David
Subject: FW: [GRRN] seeking info on commercial = wet/dry programs
Date: Thursday, July 22, 1999 6:11PM

FYI
 ----------
From: Eric Lombardi <
To: Angela BRANTLEY
Subject: Re: [GRRN] seeking info on commercial = wet/dry programs
Date: Thursday, July 22, 1999 8:27AM

At 01:34 PM 7/21/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Eric:  I have been under the impression = that wet/dry collection gives a
mixed message to the users and that recycling does = not become part of their
mentality.  Any validity to that?
>Angela Brantley
>City of Monterey
>brantley@ci.monterey.ca.us
>


Hi Angela,

I have confronted this issue before, and its = interesting.
What do you suppose the problem is ... that wet/dry = makes
it too easy?  Just throw it in here (dry side) = and it will
be sorted out for recycling.  The wet side = becomes compost.

I believe that increased convenience is the = key
to all landfill diversion strategies ... recycling, = composting
and buy recycled programs.

The real problem that needs to be faced, for both = wet/dry and
conventional systems, is the "garbage in, = garbage out" issue.
The crappy plastics that people buy and use everyday = need to be
converted into "bio-plastics" which will = compost...the end-use
markets need to be mandated to use recycled content, = thus driving
up demand ... products need to be designed and made = with
recyclability in mind ... and then the public must = buy the
"ecological option" off the shelf.

My interest in wet/dry assumes that progress = continues to be made
on many other fronts ... most of them more important = than the
"end of the pipe" issue (landfills vs = recycling) because I think
the upstream issues of resource depletion and = ecosystem degradation
are the true problems we need to focus on.

So, assuming we win the battles on these other = fronts, then the
inevitable "waste" stream will be full of = good stuff, "resources",
ready to be sorted and put back into use.  The = wet/dry system then
becomes the road to ZeroWaste.

Did this make sense?  I know my vision of the = future is decades ahead
of today, but thats OK,,, we're talking big changes = in the world here!

Eric

------_=_NextPart_001_01BED552.81763A9A--