RE: [GreenYes] glass recovery from commingled curbside program

[Heide Feldman <hfeldman@mrwmd.org>]

The City of L.A. has a commingled program and they claim they get a pretty good recycle rate for the glass, I enough usable material at the end of the process.  Other cities collect everything else commingled except for the glass.  I think it's true that mixing all materials together has lowered the value of glass and made it mostly a contaminant.

Heidi Feldman
Public Education Coordinator
Monterey Regional Waste Management District
Tel.: 831/384-5313     FAX: 831/384-3567

-----Original Message-----
From: Helen Spiegelman [mailto:hspie@telus.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 8:14 AM
To: eric@ecocycle.org; Michele Raymond
Cc: Steve Hammer; GreenYes
Subject: Re: [GreenYes] glass recovery from commingled curbside program

A cynic might speculate that the only reason to include glass in curbside is that because of its weight it bumps up recovery rates (as long as recovery is measured as material collected at curbside as opposed to material successfully marketed.

H.


At 08:39 AM 03/13/2002 -0700, Eric Lombardi wrote:

Hi Michele,

You're a brave woman to say this ... and it makes me wonder if its true?
Can anyone out there make a "compelling environmental reason" to collect
curbside glass?   The key statement here is "curbside" as opposed to
recycling glass through drop-off centers.

Eric Lombardi
EcoCycle

Michele Raymond wrote:

> It may be heavy, but there is no compelling environmental reason to collect
> glass curbside.
>
> They should try to collect plastic and aluminum,as they have higher
> value.  Just a personal observation
> Glass contaminates other streams too.
> Michele Raymond
>
> At 03:24 PM 3/12/02 -0500, Steve Hammer wrote:
> >As you're probably aware, NYC is in the thick of a debate over its metal
> >glass and plastic recycling program.
> >
> >One of the most contentious issues is what to do about glass -- the city
> >claims that markets have essentially disappeared, and now simply counts all
> >glass collected as part of the 40% residue rate coming out of the processing
> >facilities that sort the material.
> >
> >Obviously, part of the problem is the way it's collected and processed --
> >compacted in a packer truck, dumped onto a concrete floor, and then jostled
> >on a conveyor belt to a picking line.  Very little remains intact.
> >
> >I'm interested in learning more about the markets that other (preferably
> >large) cities have found for their material.  Using Chaz Miller's Waste Age
> >profile from a few months ago, are we destined to low value applications
> >(fill, cover replacement, glassphalt)?
> >
> >What steps have other cities taken to ensure they have a marketable cullet?
> >Are redemption centers or curbside sorting the only way to achieve a
> >marketable material?
> >
> >Thanks for any feedback you can provide.
> >
> >
> >Steve Hammer
> >(w) 212-645-9912
> >shammer@wastesaver.com
> >
> >
> >
> >******************************************
> >To post to the greenyes list,
> >email to: greenyes@grrn.org
> >
> >Subscription information for
> >this list is available here:
> >http://www.grrn.org/general/greenyes.html
> >******************************************
>
> Michele Raymond
> Publisher
> Recycling Laws International/ State Recycling Laws Update
> 5111 Berwyn Rd. Ste 115 College Park, MD 20740)
> 301/345-4237   Fax 345-4768
> http://www.raymond.com
>
> ******************************************
> To post to the greenyes list,
> email to: greenyes@grrn.org
>
> Subscription information for
> this list is available here:
> http://www.grrn.org/general/greenyes.html
> ******************************************

--
ÐÏࡱá


******************************************
To post to the greenyes list,
email to: greenyes@grrn.org

Subscription information for
this list is available here:
http://www.grrn.org/general/greenyes.html
******************************************