GreenYes Archives

[GreenYes Archives] - [Thread Index] - [Date Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]

RE: [greenyes] landfill bans

My organization is having a policy conference in August and will be
addressing some of these issue. I'll send out the web address once we have
all the information up regarding this sessions and the others we'll be
conducting that relate to solid waste.

-----Original Message-----
From: Heidi Feldman [mailto:hfeldman@no.address]
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 4:34 PM
To: Helen Spiegelman; greenyes
Subject: RE: [greenyes] landfill bans

Good points! At our facility, we provide preferable rates for greenwaste,
wood waste, inerts, etc. to encourage recycling (from 50 to 300% discount in
the tipping fee). I agree wholeheartedly with the issues you raise, since my
job is to teach the public about recycling and keeping these materials OUT
of the landfill. However, I see two large challenges that you don't
mention.first, we don't screen or sort through the waste that comes to our
landfill. All those cans and bottles will be buried without anyone looking
for them. We don't feel that sorting garbage is a job we want anyone to do
(and we do lots of sorting at our dirty MRF, including hands on). Second,
what would be the ultimate public education program to teach people to
recycle every bottle and can? We do a lot but obviously more can be
achieved. The numbers you cite are alarming and would probably hold true for
most other landfills as well.

I think the follow-up discussion should focus on what we can do to address
these issues.

Heidi Feldman, Public Education Coordinator

Monterey Regional Waste Management District

From: Helen Spiegelman [mailto:hspie@no.address]
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 7:12 AM
To: greenyes
Subject: RE: [greenyes] landfill bans

I think it would be well-advised for SWANA -- and especially for the
elected officials who oversee municipal waste management in their
communities -- to consider the original purpose of municipal solid waste
management: to protect the public health by ensuring that the streets were
cleared of garbage.

MSWM began as a policing authority, but it quickly became a public service
that put private waste companies out of business (see Susan Strasser, Waste
and Want: a social history...).

My local waste authority found in its 2001 waste composition audit that an
estimated 33 million refundable aluminum cans went to our 2 publicly owned
landfills and WTE facility in that year (at considerable profit to our local
government, which sits on a huge capital reserve made up of surplus
revenues from tipping fees). These aluminum cans have a redemption value of
over $2 million -- in one year, from one metropolitan area with a population
of 1.5 million. In addition, who knows how many wine and liquor bottles,
juice containers, water bottles, and other refundable containers that have
lower redemption rates were hauled away with the trash? (all beverages
except milk are included in our deposit system)

I did a quick analysis of the waste audit and estimated that two-thirds of
the material disposed in our region was either easily recyclable products
(ones under deposit or included in municipal programs) or easily compostable
organics. Some of these materials are banned from disposal, but the bans are
not being enforced. Others should be banned but are not (e.g. yard waste,
which is collected in all communities but not banned from disposal).

I showed this information to our elected officials and recommended that
local waste authorities dedicate resources in two key areas:

- shut the gate: enforce disposal bans on products and materials that have
recycling/composting programs available -- especially EPR programs. Bans are
a key part of local government's policing function and should be resourced

- step up to the plate: don't allow our community's compostable organics
to go to landfills where they contribute to global warming. This should be
where SWANA engineers apply their considerable expertise: providing
efficient, effective programs to manage this threat to public health and
safety. Organics are the fraction of MSW that is "produced" by the community
and the community should take responsibility for it, just as we insist the
producers of soft drinks and electronics should take responsibility for
their products.


At 12:33 PM 3/1/2005, Heidi Feldman wrote:

SWANA has a motto."No ban without a plan." Often there is no mechanism in
place to deal with the results of a ban. Our agency (landfill and recycling
programs) is charged with carrying out a lot of the programs initiated by
the state (and mostly we welcome that California has been the leader in
these issues). Many times we have to scramble to meet the public demands
after the state says "no" to a material in the landfill.
Heidi Feldman, Public Educ.
Monterey Regional Waste Mgt. District

From: Amy Bauman [mailto:abauman@no.address]
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 12:16 PM
To: 'Jenny Gitlitz'; 'greenyes'
Subject: RE: [greenyes] landfill bans

That's a great point, Jenny. Regulations cannot operate in isolation.
They need to be accompanied by enforcement budgets as well as educational

Likewise, banning materials before there are markets for them is
fruitless. This is beyond the original question, of course, but I'd like
to say that in the case of Massachusetts, I was extremely impressed with the
way in which the state called on a diverse group of interests over the
course of two years for input into the pending ban of certain types of
building materials from landfills. It was a collaboration among different
departments within the DEP, haulers, transfer stations, consultants like
myself, contractors,and architects.

In the end, DEP held off banning certain materials (like carpet, asphalt
shingles, and wallboard) that were deemed to have insufficient markets to
take up the slack. We continue to work as a team to explore markets so
that one day they can be added to the list. In the mean time, it's up to
people like me to find ways to divert materials back to industries that see
the value in accepting post-consumer material in as feedstock.

Amy B.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jenny Gitlitz [mailto:jenny.gitlitz@no.address]
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:58 PM
To: abauman@no.address; greenyes
Subject: Re: [greenyes] landfill bans

Without state and local enforcement, landfill bans are inadequate. Here in
Dalton, MA, for example, the town does not enforce its own regs requiring
pvt haulers to provide recycling; much recyclable material ends up
landfilled. Some of us are working to change this, but there's always local
politics... Landfill bans were originally a back-door way of requiring local
recycling--without being perceived as unfunded mandates. But since the
enforcement is also largely unfunded, the onus remains on local government
to act or not act when haulers violate the ban.


Jennifer Gitlitz

Research Director, Container Recycling Institute

Home Office:

2 Pomeroy Ave.

Dalton, MA 01226

Tel. (413) 684-4746

Mobile: (413) 822-0115

Fax: (413) 403-0233

Email: jgitlitz@no.address

Please note the new address for CRI's main office:

Container Recycling Institute

1601 North Kent St., Suite 803

Arlington, VA 22209-2105

Tel. (703) 276-9800

Fax: (703) 276-9587

On 3/1/05 1:58 PM, Amy Bauman at abauman@no.address wrote:

Hi Dan -

Massachusett's DEP's language on bans begins on page four of the document
linked below


Amy Bauman

Director of Business Development



617-504-2095 (mobile)

-----Original Message-----

From: Dan De Grassi [mailto:dpw180@no.address]

Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 1:08 PM

To: greenyes@no.address

Subject: [greenyes] landfill bans

Good morning. I'm looking for links to examples of local government
ordinances banning recyclables, etc. from landill disposal. Any

[GreenYes Archives] - [Date Index] - [Thread Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]