Technical Memo #1: Solid waste diversion (i.e. the first 3Rs: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle)

Transcription

1 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Rachael Ryder Waste Diversion Program Leader Maura Walker DATE: July 6, 2015 PROJECT: Regional Solid Waste Management Plan SUBJECT: Technical Memo #1: Opportunities to Increase Waste Diversion 1. Background The (RDFFG) is reviewing and updating its 2008 Regional Solid Waste Management Plan (RSWMP). The updated plan is intended to provide a region wide vision for solid waste management for the next years. The plan will be updated in 3 phases. The first phase focuses on an assessment of the current system for managing solid waste in the RDFFG. The report summarizing the current system, entitled Phase 1 Report: Existing Solid Waste Management System is complete. This report provides a starting point for the development of an updated plan. The second phase includes identification and assessment of various waste management options for inclusion in the updated plan. Consideration will be given to the options selected for inclusion in the current (2008) RSWMP, as well as to existing programs and services. To facilitate the identification of options, technical memos will be prepared by the consultants to provide a long list of options for consideration and discussion at the Technical Advisory Committee meetings. The technical memos will cover the following elements of plan development. Technical Memo #1: Solid waste diversion (i.e. the first 3Rs: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) Technical Memo #2: Residual waste management (i.e. solid waste disposal) Technical Memo #3: Financing and Financial Implications Input from the Advisory Committee will be sought on each of the memos and this input will assist with the selection of options for inclusion in the updated plan. The options which are selected will be researched in more detail for their specific application within the RDFFG, including estimated costs and their synergy with other plan components. A Phase 2 report that details the preferred options will be prepared for review by the advisory committees prior to undertaking community and stakeholder consultation. This is the first technical memo, focusing on waste diversion option addressing the first three tiers of the waste management hierarchy: reduction, reuse and recycling. This memo also includes options related to extended producer responsibility (EPR).

2 These options are presented for consideration at the July 29, 2015 meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee. 2. Reduction and Reuse Reduction and reuse prevent waste from entering the waste management system and ultimately conserve resources. Reduction and reuse are at the top of the waste management hierarchy, they are generally given the least amount of attention as local government mechanisms to manage waste. Although we have achieved some level of success in diverting a portion of the waste we generate to recycling and composting, overall, we are still discarding as much waste today per capita as we did ten years ago. The lack of local government resources dedicated to reduce and reuse is likely due to the daunting task of figuring out how a local government can effectively tackle the consumer lifestyle that many citizens have fully embraced, not to mention how to influence the environmental design of products and packaging that comes from all corners of the globe. Further, the impact of reduction and reuse programs can be difficult to measure (compared to recycling programs) and therefore it is challenging to rationalize public expenditures in support of reduction and reuse programs. Real change will ultimately have to be driven from the consumer level. This can be driven by consumer demand for more durable goods, and by the extended use of goods already in service. What does the 2008 RSWMP say about reduction and reuse? The following actions are listed in the 2008 RSWMP: Establish swap sheds at all manned RDFFG landfills and transfer stations Promote reduction and reuse Encourage backyard composting What is being done now in regards to reduction and reuse? Swap sheds are available at Valemount, Mackenzie, McBride, Dunster and Bear Lake. Swap sheds were removed from Foothills and Quinn St due to operational challenges and the presence of alternate reuse opportunities available locally. For promotion: RDFFG produces a thrift store brochure RDFFG and REAPS collaborate on a Junk in Your Trunk Community Garage Sale REAPS maintains a brochure listing available reuse opportunities REAPS promotes grasscycling Backyard composting is encouraged through the support of a composting demonstration garden and advisory service provided by REAPS. Additionally RDFFG sells low cost backyard composters to the public and provides both on line and hard copy information on bear smart backyard composting. In addition, there are other reuse opportunities in the RDFFG available through consignment and thrift stores, through on line services such as Freecycle.org, and through many rental, repair and maintenance shops. Page 2 of 18 July 6, 2015

3 What other options are available in support of reduction and reuse? 1. Develop campaigns to encourage reduction and reuse behavior. Develop a regionally coordinated approach to reducing the use of single use packaging such as plastic bags, coffee cups and water bottles that can be implemented by the RDFFG, member municipalities and other interested organizations. Squamish s Take Back the Tap campaign that aimed to reduce single use water bottles is an example of a reduction and reuse campaign. 2. Expand reuse events. Hold additional events like the Junk in the Trunk sale that promote reuse, and consider expansion to the other municipalities. Other examples of reuse promoting events include those held in Squamish and Nanaimo. Squamish s Re Use It Fair is similar to a giant yard sale except that everything is free. In 2013, the fair diverted an estimated 90 tonnes of material that would otherwise be considered waste. Leftover goods are Squamish ReUse It Fair recycled, or landfilled if they cannot be recycled. The City of Nanaimo holds an annual Reuse Rendezvous where for one weekend each spring residents can put reusable goods out on the curb with a distinct tag for others to pick up for free. Leftover items must be taken back in by the resident. The cost of this program is limited to promotion and the printing of tags. 3. Establish Equipment Libraries. At the Pender Island Recycling depot, there is a full set of roughly 100 table settings (dishes, cutlery, glassware, coffee cups) for use by any member of the community. The materials are items that were donated to the depot (they don t all match!) and are stored in plastic crates so that they can be lent out in a manner similar to borrowing a book from a library. Another example of an equipment library is the Vancouver Tool Library, a cooperative tool lending library that loans a wide variety of tools for home repair, gardening, and bicycle maintenance. They also offer low cost workshops on tool related skills and projects. 4. Promote reuse/reduction mind set. Examples of activities that encourage people to learn about and practice reduction and reuse include: o Conduct repair your stuff training workshops o Promote gifts of experience over material goods. Metro Vancouver provides their Make Memories, Not Garbage campaign graphics to other local governments at no cost. o Hold an annual art contest and display using reused/salvages materials 5. Conduct a Love Food Hate Waste style campaign. In 2007, an organization called WRAP started Love Food Hate Waste (LFHW) which helps UK households tackle food waste. The program is Page 3 of 18 July 6, 2015

4 designed for avoidable food waste the roughly 60% of food waste which could have been eaten. If this statistic was directly applicable to RDFFG, it would indicate that roughly 6% of what we landfill is avoidable residential food waste. LFHW partners with different groups (retailers and brands, local government, businesses, and community groups) to develop campaigns and tools for specific audiences to change behaviour to reduce food waste. These campaigns focus on food waste thrown away by households. Strategies focus on why food is thrown away at different stages: planning, buying, storage, preparation and use different communications channels, either directly or through partners, to encourage behaviour change. Following a Love Food Hate Waste campaign in West London, avoidable food waste decreased by 14% in just six months. Additionally, for every dollar invested the municipality estimated that it saved up to eight times that much in avoided waste management costs (i.e. collection and composting). The Province has borrowed materials developed by the US EPA to address food waste reduction. These materials are available at no cost to local governments. 3. Residential Waste Diversion Residential waste refers to waste generated by homes and apartments. An estimated 20% of waste landfilled comes from the residential curbside collection programs. An additional amount of residential waste comes from multi family buildings (collected as commercial waste) and from residents that selfhaul their garbage to the landfill or transfer station. Consequently, it would be appropriate to assume that 25 30% of landfilled waste comes from the residential sector, with the vast majority of that waste coming from single family homes serviced by municipal curbside collection. What does the RSWMP say about residential waste diversion? The following actions are listed in the 2008 RSWMP: Curbside recycling in Prince George Depot based recycling at manned transfer stations for residential recyclables, scrap metal and ODS containing appliances Reduce weekly residential garbage can limit to 2 cans in all municipalities except Prince George Maintain variable cart rates in Prince George Enforce ban on recyclables in garbage in Prince George Seasonal yard waste drop off depots at manned transfer stations and landfills Mackenzie to implement spring and fall curbside yard waste collection (2 days of collection/season) Prince George to assess the potential for yard waste collection (curbside and depot based), with consideration for including food waste and soiled paper What is being done now in regards to residential waste diversion? As of May 2014, residential recyclables became regulated under the Province s Recycling Regulation; meaning that the responsibility for the collection and recycling of residential recyclables (referred to as packaging and printed paper ) has been transferred to the manufacturers and retailers (the producers ) of packaged products and printers of paper consumed by the residential sector. In response to the regulation, Multi Material BC (MMBC) was formed by the producers to establish a system for collecting and processing residential recyclables in BC. Page 4 of 18 July 6, 2015

5 RDFFG provides drop off services for residential recyclables (paper, cardboard, plastic and metal containers) at 13 transfer stations and at the Foothills and Mackenzie Regional Landfills. RDFFG does not receive funding from MMBC to operate these depots. In September 2014, MMBC implemented curbside recycling to homes in the City of Prince George that receive municipal curbside garbage collection. Initial monthly data indicates that the amount of curbside garbage has decreased from 1 5% since the program s inception. The City does not enforce its ban on residential recyclables in their curbside garbage collection service; however it does offer garbage collection rates based on volume, which may act as an incentive for residents to use available recycling services. MMBC also provides financial incentives to 2 bottle depots in Prince George (Hart Return It and Prince George Recycling & Return It) to provide depot collection of the same residential recyclables as are collected curbside, plus plastic bags, glass containers and polystyrene foam. There are 2 private collection companies that provide recycling collection to homes and multi family buildings in Prince George and the surrounding area on a subscription basis. Yard waste from homes is accepted at a number of depots at no charge throughout the regional district; there are 3 in Prince George, and one in each of Shelley, Valemount and Mackenzie. The City of Prince George has banned burning of yard waste and is currently considering seasonal drop off bins for residential yard waste. What other options are available for residential waste diversion? 1. Actively promote existing recycling opportunities. o Using of both on line and traditional media o Municipalities could combine information about recycling with their garbage collection information. o This could include re branding the RDFFG recycling program to reinvigorate participation 2. Review current garbage collection can limits and cart fees to ensure that the pricing structure provides significant financial incentives to minimize waste and maximize recycling/composting. 3. Consider implementation of curbside recycling collection in Mackenzie, Valemount and McBride. Curbside recycling collection typically achieves a much higher level of diversion than depots. o If financial incentives from a producer responsibility organization are available (e.g. MMBC offers an incentive of $35 40/home/yr), or o Regardless of the availability of external funding. The cost to provide curbside recycling would be highly dependent on each municipalities current cost of garbage collection and their ability to collect recycling with existing equipment. Page 5 of 18 July 6, 2015

6 Case Study: Smithers Curbside Recycling Program In May 2014, Smithers implemented curbside recycling as part of the new MMBC collection program. Prior to May 2014, Smithers provided cart based garbage collection on a weekly basis to 1,700 homes. To not increase their collection costs, when the recycling program began, they began alternating weekly collection of garbage and recycling. Blue recycling carts were purchased for each home ($76/cart), and were paid for with gas tax funding. Staff time was required to assemble and distribute the carts. They also spent $10,000 on the development of related promotion and education materials. They hired a part time person to liaise with the community for 3 4 months at the program start up. This person set up information booths at the farmers market and other community events. The program launched smoothly and Council is very happy with the program one year later. Because of the MMBC financial incentive ($37.25/home/year), the operating cost for their curbside collection program went down. They currently charge $118/home/year for garbage and recycling collection. Part of this user fee goes into a reserve for truck and cart replacement in the future. 4. Prohibit recyclables from being mixed with residential garbage and enforce the bylaw through occasional inspections. o For positive reinforcement, this approach could be linked with a recognition program like Hamilton s Gold Box program that provide a gold coloured recycling box to randomly selected homes that were found to have sorted their recycling correctly (homes had to sign up with the City to be included in gold box contest). In RDFFG, a gold garbage can or cart could be a reward for homes with no recyclables in their garbage. 5. Consider implementing curbside yard waste collection in areas where a yard waste composting facility exists. Note that this option requires that the composting facility has capacity to handle additional yard waste. o Yard waste collection programs sometime include vegetative kitchen scraps. 6. Consider implementing curbside food scraps collection if/when a facility with the capacity to process this material has been developed (see options under organics management ). o Food scraps collection typically costs the same as garbage collection and can generally be done in the same truck. o In addition to collection and processing costs, there is an additional cost for collection containers, which is generally $40 per home in areas with manual collection. In areas with cart based collection, food scraps are typically collected with yard waste. Carts ranges in cost from $ Page 6 of 18 July 6, 2015

7 o o Food scraps only collection programs typically collect food weekly and garbage bi weekly Food waste combined with yard waste can be collected bi weekly, alternating with garbage collection; which may result in no increased collection costs due to the implementation of the service. Case Study: Port Coquitlam Yard Waste and Food Scraps Collection Program The City of Port Coquitlam provides fully automated waste collection services to over 11,500 residential properties throughout the City. The City provides specially designed 240 litre green waste carts to all properties that receive the service. Organics are collected weekly (May to December) and bi weekly the rest of the year. Garbage is collected biweekly year round. Port Coquitlam residents currently divert 63% of their household waste away from the landfill (through recycling and organics diversion) saving tens of thousands in disposal fees each year. The combined fee for the organics and garbage service is $ per annum. The organics portion (separate cart for organics) is estimated in the range of $77 to $80 per household per annum. 7. Consider the following options to increase diversion by multi family buildings: o Conduct a needs assessment. There is no current data on how many buildings have recycling collection services, nor has there been a detailed assessment of the barriers to hiring a service. Understanding the current situation would assist in developing an effective program and/or communications. o If there is a private collector that receives MMBC funding, ensure that multi family building managers and strata councils are aware of this option. o Where private recycling collection services exist, implement mandatory recycling. Mandatory recycling is the requirement that all multi family buildings have a recycling service. In Whistler and Oliver, it is mandatory for each building to have a recycling collection service, but the service provider is the choice of the building owner/manager. o Require space for recycling to be designed into new multi family developments (as part of the development or building permit process). One of the most common barriers to implementing recycling in apartments is the lack of space for the collection bins. To mitigate this barrier, many municipalities in North America are including mandatory space allocations in their building requirements for both new developments and significant redevelopments and renovations. For example, in September 2013, Pitt Meadows council adopted Policy No.C060: Specifications for Garbage, Organics, and Recycling Storage Space in New Multi Family Residential and Mixed Use Developments. Pitt Meadows based their specifications on a model bylaw developed by Metro Vancouver in consultation with the municipalities and the development community. The model is intended to create consistency within the regional district on space allocation, as well as reduce the amount of legwork each municipality would have to undertake to prepare their own policy. Page 7 of 18 July 6, 2015

8 4. Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (ICI) Waste What does the RSWMP say about ICI Waste? To encourage businesses to engage in recycling, the current RSWMP includes the introduction of bans on recyclable materials in the garbage (enforced at manned transfer stations and landfills) and an associated promotion and education program targeting businesses. What is being done now in regards to ICI waste diversion? Tipping fees on commercial loads of waste at most RDFFG facilities acts as a financial incentive for waste diversion. With increasing tipping fees, there has been a corresponding increase in the amount of cardboard collection activity in the Prince George area. However, other than tipping fees, there is limited encouragement for businesses to get involved in waste diversion activities. What other options are available for ICI waste diversion? 1. Apply differential tipping fees to encourage source separation. Differential tipping fees apply different per tonne charges to the various categories of waste materials delivered to a transfer station or landfill. Differential fees can be used as a pricing signal to commercial waste generators and haulers to source separate their waste materials for diversion. The table below is an example of how tipping fees can be varied to support waste diversion objectives. This is an abridged version of the tipping fee schedule used by Central Kootenay Regional District. Garbage Loads containing more than 20% recyclables Scrap metal Yard and garden waste $85/t $170/t $40/t $50/t 2. Assist private collectors to encourage more/better recycling by the ICI sector: This could be achieved through the development and distribution of consistent signage and messaging for use on collection containers and within the workplace, such as those shown below. Consistency within the region should result in better participation in recycling and lower contamination of the recyclables. Page 8 of 18 July 6, 2015

9 3. Implement disposal restrictions on readily divertible materials. To encourage source separation and diversion, many regional districts and municipalities implement disposal bans on recyclable and compostable materials. This is a low cost policy tool that signals to waste generators and waste collection companies that they are expected to separate and recycle/compost specific materials for which alternatives are readily available (e.g. cardboard, metal, yard waste). Disposal bans are enforced at the point of disposal (i.e. at transfer stations and landfills) through the application of significant surcharges on garbage found to contain banned materials. 4. Require recycling collection services at all ICI locations. As noted above for multi family buildings, Whistler is developing a bylaw that requires all businesses to have recycling and organic waste collection. This service is provided by commercial haulers (or can be self hauled to the transfer station) at no cost to the municipality other than the cost of promotion (initially) and (ultimately) enforcement. 5. Increase awareness of waste diversion opportunities. Develop a campaign that would increase the awareness of local recycling and composting services and the advantages of utilizing those services. An awareness campaign could also include a recognition program for businesses that actively participate in waste diversion. For example, Boulder, Colorado s Eco cycle provides window stickers for businesses that have committed to zero waste. 5. Organic Waste Processing Options to divert organic waste (yard waste and food scraps) from the residential and ICI sectors are described above. The approaches, however, can only be accomplished if there is the capacity to process the diverted materials. What does the RSWMP say about organic waste processing? The current RSWMP includes the following actions: Increase the capacity of the Foothills Boulevard composting site to accept yard waste Assess the need and costs for an improved composting operation at the Mackenzie Landfill (to be completed in advance of implementing curbside yard waste collection in Mackenzie) Assess the composting of yard waste at the closed Valemount landfill Update the RDFFG s 2002 organics composting feasibility study. What is being done now in regards to organic waste processing? Marketing campaign underway for Norgrow compost, which should result in increased capacity at the Foothills composting site Yard waste is ground and applied to the land at the Mackenzie landfill site Yard waste is put into a static pile at the Valemount landfill site Page 9 of 18 July 6, 2015

10 What other options are available for organic waste processing? 1. Update the organics composting feasibility study. This study would, as per the 2008 RSWMP, look at recent composting facility developments and technology costs; assess opportunities for cocomposting (food waste, yard waste, wood waste, sewage sludge); consider possible locations for a facility; and understand the implications of organics diversion on the long term management plan of the Foothills Boulevard Regional Landfill. In the 2008 RSWMP, the estimated cost to update the study was $40, Assess the options to manage organic waste for Mackenzie and Valemount. In recent years, more small scale food and yard waste composting facilities have become operational, ranging from lowtech windrow composting of food and yard waste at the Grand Forks landfill to higher tech (and higher cost) in vessel composting facilities such as Comox Valley s pilot scale facility, and as a result, there is better operational and cost data available. Currently, costs range from an estimated $60 to $400 per tonne for a small facility (not including land cost), depending on the technology selected and equipment required. An assessment would look at the Comox Valley Pilot Composting Facility cost/benefit of establishing local composting facilities relative to transfer and landfilling. 6. Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste Diversion C&D waste is typically 15 25% of landfilled waste, often varying with the amount of economic activity in any given year. Much of this waste is recyclable or compostable, including cardboard, plastic, metal and wood, and therefore this waste stream can represent a significant waste diversion opportunity. What does the RSWMP say about C&D waste diversion? The current RSWMP includes the following actions: An assessment of C&D waste diversion opportunities will be undertaken as part of a study to determine long term C&D disposal capacity requirements The RDFFG will work with Municipal and Regional Building Permit and Planning Departments to assess the feasibility of: o variable permit costs (deconstruction vs. demolition) to encourage source separation, reuse and recycling of DLC Waste; o mandatory solid waste management plans for large construction projects to ensure that waste diversion is considered in the planning for construction; and o green building standards (e.g., LEED) that will reduce the amount of waste generated during construction and through the life of the building. C&D waste diversion will be supported by variable tipping fees (lower tipping fees on sourceseparated recyclable/compostable materials) and disposal bans. Page 10 of 18 July 6, 2015

11 What is being done now regarding C&D waste diversion? There are no local government initiatives in place to encourage C&D waste diversion. Some C&D wastes, such as concrete, pavement and scrap metal are being recycled in the Prince George area through private initiatives. In addition, there is some reuse of used building materials through salvaging contractors and through donation of reusable materials to the Heart and Hands Salvage Store in Prince George. What other options are available for C&D waste diversion? The options listed in the current RSWMP remain viable options to enhance the diversion of C&D waste. Some other options that could be considered are: Permit Related Options 1. Require waste management plans for large construction, demolition and renovation projects. These plans would require contractors to pre plan for how they will manage waste, and may require that specific materials are reused or recycled as a condition of building/demolition permits. Contractors must prepare a waste management plan and track materials throughout the project. An example of this approach is Port Moody, as described in the case study below. Case Study: Port Moody mandatory solid waste management plans Port Moody Waste Management Bylaw No.2822 regulates the amount of waste generated by new construction or demolition of structures sent to the landfill. A waste management plan is required for every building permit application. In addition to submitting a waste management plan in order to get a permit, contractors must pay a fee, like a deposit, that is refunded once the contractor has demonstrated that they implemented their plan. A Compliance Report must be submitted to the Building Official with attached receipts from recycling facilities and landfills indicating the amounts of each material recycled and disposed of. The following types of projects are exempt: Small renovations to Single Family Dwellings. Buildings under 50 square meters in area. Additions under 20 square meters in area. Buildings certified to LEEDS standard This bylaw was the basis for a model bylaw developed by Metro Vancouver that is being considered by other member municipalities. Page 11 of 18 July 6, 2015

12 Service related options: 2. Identify new recycling processors and markets for additional materials. For instance, Cascades reported that they have a market for wood waste. This opportunity, once confirmed, could be supported through policy initiatives such as variable tipping fees and landfill restrictions. 3. Provide drop off bins/areas for small volume source separated C&D waste at the Foothill Boulevard Regional Landfill site. 4. Set the tone for private sector C&D waste recycling capacity to be developed, which could include: Provision of a put or pay contract (guaranteed provision of a certain amount of waste) Policies (disposal restrictions, tipping fees, requiring all C&D waste to go to a processor) Collection (e.g. drop off areas at manned landfills and transfer sites) 5. Establish an area at Mackenzie and Valemount disposal facilities for reusable C&D waste and/or consider collaborating with a non profit organization to run a C&D reuse facility. The Regional District of Okanagan Similkameen works with a social service organization to recover reusable materials from loads of C&D waste and uses the materials to manufacture salable goods (sheds, composters, etc.). Whistler provides space to Whistler Community Services Society to operate a non profit retail store that sells donations of C&D related discards from contractors, including functioning appliances and some furniture. 6. Hold off on provision of services until the Province announces how C&D materials will be incorporated into BC s extended producer responsibility system. The Province has indicated that it intends to include construction and demolition materials in its Recycling Regulation, thereby requiring an EPR program be established. However, the Province has not provided a timeline for this inclusion and is currently paused on expanding the list of materials in the Recycling Regulation. Targeted promotion/education options: 7. Provide a C&D waste recycling/reuse directory on the website. Hard copies of the directory can be distributed to members of local construction associations. 8. Develop a Contractors Guide to C&D waste reduction, reuse and recycling in the Prince George area (similar information could be included the waste management facility brochures for Mackenzie, Valemount and McBride. Construction/demo industry toolkits have already been developed by other government agencies, including Metro and Metro Portland. These materials could be borrowed for use by RDFFG. 9. To assist in developing effective tools for C&D waste diversion, work with local industry associations to determine diversion related barriers and needs. Page 12 of 18 July 6, 2015

13 7. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is a provincial policy tool that aims to shift the responsibility for end of life management of products (physically and economically) to the producer and away from local governments. This policy is intended to create an incentive for producers to include environmental considerations in design of products. What does the RSWMP say about EPR? Advocate the Province and the federal government for improved/expanded Extended Producer Responsibility and enforcement of existing regulations; Continue to participate on BC Product Stewardship Council; Advocate for the effective collection services for EPR products in the RDFFG, including the presence of collection services in the RDFFG and full cost recovery for organizations operating as collection points for EPR products; Work with stewardship organizations to ensure all areas of the RDFFG have reasonable access to collection programs through depots and/or round up events; and Promote and educate the public about existing EPR programs and how they can be accessed in the RDFFG What is being done now in regards to EPR? RDFFG is a member of the BC Product Stewardship Council, a body that advocates on behalf of local government for effective product stewardship programs. RDFFG staff has also engaged in consultation and discussions with stewardship agencies in their program development process. The table below shows the number of EPR depots for each EPR program within the RDFFG. As shown, Prince George is well serviced by EPR take back services, but the rest of the region is much more limited in terms of places where regulated products can be dropped off. Program Prince George Mackenzie Valemount McBride AlarmRecycle smoke and carbon monoxide alarms) BC Tire Stewardship tires BCUOMA used oil, oil containers, oil filters BCUOMA antifreeze Call2Recycle/CWTA rechargeable batteries and cell phones Cdn Battery Association lead acid batteries CESA small appliances and electrical equipment Encorp beverage containers EPRA electronics: computers, televisions, audio visual, medical equipment, office equipment Health Product Stewardship Association pharmaceuticals LightRecycle lamps and lighting equipment Page 13 of 18 July 6, 2015

14 Program Prince George Mackenzie Valemount McBride Multi Material BC residential packaging and curbside printed paper collection + 2 depots OPEI outdoor power equipment Product Care paint Product Care solvents and flammable liquids, gasoline and pesticides Switch the Stat thermostats The Ministry of Environment plans to expand EPR to include construction and demolition materials, furniture, textiles and carpet. The timing of these expansions is unknown. What other options are available for EPR? The options listed in the current plan are underway and still relevant. Other options to consider include: 1. Establish a policy framework for making decisions regarding participation in current and future EPR programs. As EPR becomes an increasingly significant component of BC s waste management system, the RDFFG and member municipalities may benefit from determining the extent that they wish to engage in EPR related services. In BC, three models of local participation appear to be emerging: i. Provide as broad a range of EPR drop off services at local solid waste facilities as possible (i.e. try to provide one stop drops ) ii. Minimize local government participation or do not participate in EPR programs directly iii. Hybrid: Participate in the collection of specific products and packaging based on some or all of the following: o Available space and resources to manage the EPR program at local government facilities o The current role of the local government in collecting the designated product/package o The level of remuneration offered by stewardship organizations for the collection service o The presence of alternative service providers (e.g. A local bottle depot operates as a take back depot). 2. In particular, the role of RDFFG and member municipalities (with the exception of Prince George) in the collection of residential packaging and printed paper needs consideration, since this has been a traditional role of local governments (like garbage collection), but as of May 2014, residential recycling is now an EPR program led by MMBC. Current options available to local governments in regards to collection of residential recyclables are: a. Become a collector on behalf of MMBC and accept their financial incentives to undertake this service. Page 14 of 18 July 6, 2015

15 b. Do not provide collection services on behalf of MMBC and let MMBC determine the appropriate type and level of services to be provided to each municipality. c. Provide collection services without receiving remuneration from MMBC (or participating in their program). 8. Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) HHW represents approximately 2% of landfilled waste. Although small in volume, its toxic nature requires that there are on going efforts to reduce its presence in landfills. The vast majority of HHW, such as paint, pesticides and batteries are included on of BC s EPR programs (listed in the previous section What does the RSWMP say about HHW? The current RSWMP includes the following actions: develop an education campaign in regards to proper disposal of HHW; broadly promote EPR drop off facilities within the RDFFG work with stewardship organizations to conduct HHW round up events and/or the establishment of depots in smaller communities; and continue to work with stewardship organizations and the Province to expand the range of HHW handled through stewardship programs. What is being done now in regards to HHW? RDFFG provides information on where HHW can be dropped off RDFFG works through the BC Product Stewardship Association to advocate for expansion of EPR services to other products What other options are available for HHW? The options listed in the current plan and the options discussed in the previous section on EPR are applicable to the management of HHW. 9. Promotion and Education The success of waste management programs and policies requires that people know and understand why and how to effectively participate. Promotion and education, therefore, are critical to all components of the solid waste management system, including components focused on waste reduction and diversion. What does the RSWMP say for promotion and education? The current RSWMP includes the following actions: Promotion and education efforts related to municipal waste management services such as garbage collection will continue to be done by each municipality. Page 15 of 18 July 6, 2015

16 The RDFFG will be responsible for promotion and education efforts related to their services such as recycling depots, transfer stations, landfills, as well as promotion and education in regards to waste reduction and reuse, composting, household hazardous waste and product stewardship programs. Promotion and education activities will include: print media, community liaison activities, promotional activities (contests and recognition programs), web based information, information phone line, and school education program What is being done now regarding promotion and education? The Regional District: o provides waste management information available on their website, including information sheets on each solid waste facility, composting information, a recycling guide and map, as well as links to other solid waste management information, including the REAPS website, o provides tours of waste management facilities, o has a waste management telephone service, o provides hard copies of brochures on a variety of waste management topics, o does advertising on the radio and in the local newspapers, and o contracts REAPS to provide a school program related to solid waste management. All of the municipalities provide information to residents and businesses regarding their waste management services. REAPS acts as a local clearinghouse for waste reduction and recycling information via the telephone, their website, workshops and a newsletter. What other options are available for promotion and education? There are a wide variety of promotion and education activities already underway in the RDFFG. The following options offer some additional options for consideration. 1. Promote RCBC s hotline and Recyclopedia instead of maintaining a local phone line and recycling directory. RCBC acts as a central repository for where to and how to recycle information for all of BC. They have both a telephone hotline and a web based information service called Recyclopedia. These services are funded primarily through local governments and stewardship agencies. 2. Conduct a survey to determine current levels of awareness. Assessing current levels of understanding (and perhaps misunderstanding) can help direct promotion and education resources, as well as determine the efficacy of existing communications. 3. Apply community based social marketing as a method to develop new waste reduction and diversion programs and campaigns. Community based social marketing (CBSM) is an approach to program promotion and education that encourages high rates of effective participation and longterm behavior change. The community based social marketing process centres on uncovering barriers that inhibit individuals from engaging in sustainable behaviours, identifying tools that have Page 16 of 18 July 6, 2015

17 been effective in fostering and maintaining behaviour change, then piloting takes place on a small portion of the community followed by ongoing evaluation once the program has been implemented community wide. Therefore, as new behaviours are identified as desirable to achieve zero waste objectives, CBSM should be employed and should include: o Identification of existing barriers to desired behaviours o Research on successful approaches in other jurisdictions o Undertake pilot projects to confirm that a selected approach will be effective in the RDFFG o Monitor and measure to confirm that objectives are being met. 10. Diversion Potential What is the potential for waste diversion through reduction and reuse? No data is available to indicate how much of what we currently landfill is avoidable. In theory, all of what we throw away as waste could eventually be regarded as resources. Initiatives targeting reduction and reuse tend to be aimed at small, incremental mind set changes that are intended to have a long term benefit on our consumption practices. On an annual basis, the impact of reduction and reuse initiatives are challenging to measure. What is the potential for residential waste diversion? Based on the 2013 waste composition study, approximately 20 25% of what is disposed as garbage by homes is recyclable and 30 35% is compostable. If the selected initiatives were able to divert 50% of the recyclable and compostable materials from RDFFG residences that are currently landfilled, there could be an estimated reduction in the amount of waste landfilled of 5 6%. What is the potential for ICI waste diversion? ICI waste accounts for 50 60% of the waste sent to landfill and therefore represents the sector with the greatest potential for diversion. According to the TRI Environmental report on the results of the RDFFG 2013 Waste Composition study, compostable organics made up the largest portion of the waste representing 25.7%. Food waste represented approximately half of the compostable organics followed by clean wood. Paper was the next largest portion of the waste stream at 22.4%. Fine paper, old corrugated cardboard (OCC) and boxboard were the largest portion of the paper waste stream. Metals represented another 6.7%. If half of recyclable paper and metal were diverted, there could be an estimated reduction in the amount of waste landfilled of 8 9%. If 50% of the compostable organics were also diverted, the total estimated reduction in the amount of waste landfilled would be 14 17%. What is the diversion potential for C&D waste diversion? Depending on the nature of the project and access to recycling facilities, up to 80 90% of C&D waste is theoretically divertible. If we assume that 20% of landfilled waste is from C&D related activities, and that it is reasonable to divert half of that waste, then the total estimated reduction in the amount of waste landfilled could be 10%. It should be noted that a large portion of C&D waste is wood waste and that establishing a market for this material is critical to achieving significant diversion of C&D waste. Page 17 of 18 July 6, 2015

18 What is the diversion potential for EPR? According to the 2013 waste composition study, HHW represents 2% of landfilled waste and electronic waste represents 3%. If the initiatives selected were able to divert half of these materials to EPR take back depots, the total estimated reduction in the amount of waste landfilled would be 2 3%. In Summary Diversion programs are intended to reduce the amount of waste landfilled in the RDFFG. The following table provides a rough estimate of the potential reduction in the amount of waste sent to landfill if programs, policies and communications, such as those listed in this memorandum are focused on waste diversion. Focus Area Reduction and Reuse Estimated Diversion Potential nominal amount Residential Diversion 5 6% ICI Diversion 14 17% Organic Waste Processing supports residential and ICI organic waste diversion Construction & Demolition Waste 10% EPR 2 3% Promotion and Education Estimated potential reduction in waste sent to landfill supports all diversion efforts 31 36% Page 18 of 18 July 6, 2015