CLARK COUNTY RECYCLING DONE RIGHT CAMPAIGN Changing and tracking recycling behavior at the curb Kim D. Harless, Environmental Operations Specialist WSRA WRED Event - March 29 th , 2018
CLARK COUNTY, WA Seven cities and a town Largest city: Vancouver 2017 Population: 474,643 2% increase in population last few years 9-12% increase in tons of garbage over last few years
500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 Inbound Tons Population
Single-Family Recycling Residue by Percent Weight of Total Inbound Recyclables 25% 22.70% 19.83% 19.14% 20% 17.81% 16.65% 15.71% 14.72% 15% 11.43% 10% 5% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Soft tactics Pros • Positive reinforcement • People may be more openly receptive • Less likely to negatively react or retaliate Cons • May not be as motivated as negative reinforcement • May not be as effective, but may have same costs 5
Public Perception Wanted to avoid… Being the “Recycling Police” Negative attitudes towards recycling Elected officials - All publicity is not good publicity Be prepared. Notify the police Notify elected officials Be able to defend your project 6
Why Tags? Point of behavior Personal individualized feedback Reaching new audiences Collect data from the curb It is effective… 7
TEST, TEST, TEST 2010 Pilot • Plastic Bags: 70% improvement • Glass Bottles: 94% improvement • Overall: 22% improvement 2012 Pilot • Saw similar results 2015 – first rollout year • Presort, post sort, and post-post sort 8
2015 Effectiveness Study Results October 17 th Control June 13th % reduction % reduction Plastic Bags/Wrap* 1.3% .78% 40% .8% 38.5% Total unacceptable 26.4% 20.5% 22.3% 19.6% 25.8% All values percent by weight *Significant declines in loose grocery bags; film and wrap remained constant Results for glass were uncertain due to seasonal changes and crushed glass “It appears that the outreach campaign had a positive impact on the quality of recyclables set out in Clark County” – Green Solutions Check out the Recycling Partnership for resources and case studies
Implementation Overview 4 weeks to target 20,000-25,000 carts with 10 temporary workers in teams of two Have only reached about 60% of households 10
Teams of two
2015 2016 2017
Data Collection Opportunities Think of the possibilities! And do it! 13
Data Collection 14
What’s in the cart? Cart Tagging By occurrence – how popular is the mistake? • The percent of the population making a mistake – where a behavior change needs to be made Characterizations Studies By ton – how massive is the problem? • The impact of those incorrect behaviors on the facility One bad apple or collective community of mistakes • Two different problems, with different ways to approach 15
10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 0.00% 5.00% How popular is the incorrect behavior? Looking Good 30.55% Hard Plastic Packaging 30.33% Plastic Bags 20.87% Plastic Wrap 19.86% To-go Cups 12.96% Paper Towels and Napkins 7.47% 2017: Percent of carts tagged for... Other Garbage 7.00% Food-soiled Paper 5.96% Foam 5.08% Food-soiled Cardboard 5.06% Tanglies 4.73% Empty from Truck 4.35% Tissue 4.28% Garbage 2.90% HHW 2.61% Glass 2.11% Food Waste 1.90% Textiles 1.80% Loose Shredded Paper 0.86% Wood 0.69% Wires 0.60% Yard Debris 0.55% Empty Set Out 0.47% Hoses 0.45% Electronics 0.44% Diapers 0.18% Light Bulbs 0.05% Pet Waste 0.05% Sharps 0.03% 16
Top offenders by popularity 1. Miscellaneous hard plastic packaging, such as clamshells, salad containers, and blister packaging 2. Plastic Bags 3. Plastic Wrap/Film 4. To-go cups (paper and plastic) 5. Paper towels and Napkins 6. Other garbage (not any other category; not a bag of garbage) • Home goods like brushes, shower curtains, plastic plants and chairs, etc. • Other plastic packaging like candy wrappers • Lids to containers • Cigarette butts and packaging 17
RESIDUE VERSUS CONTAMINATION End of the sorting process vs. Actual non-program materials due to customer error Contracted with Green Solutions in 2016 and 2017 to find answers 18
Single-Family Recycling Residue by Percent Weight of Total Inbound Recyclables 25% 22.70% 19.83% 19.14% 20% 17.81% 16.65% 15.71% 14.72% 14.70% 15% 10.60% 11.43% 10% 9.23% 8.00% 5% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Residue Rate Contamination Rate MRF Error
Impact, by weight, at the MRF? Material % Description Fines 26.0%Too small Plastic packaging 6.9%clamshells, lids, blister and other plastic packaging Other wastes 4.8%Other items like diapers and miscellaneous garbage Non-recyclable paper 4.1%Wax or plastic coated, wet strength and freezer boxes Wood and C/D 4.0% Plastic objects 3.9%like toys and other objects, not packaging Rigid plastics 3.8%Possible to be recycled within a rigid recycling program Textiles 2.8% Food Waste 2.6% Bagged garbage 2.4%A bag of garbage Glass 1.5%Any glass Plastic bags 1.4% Plastic film and wrap 1.3% Non-recyclable metals 0.7%Mixed metals, metal lids, and appliances Styrofoam 0.3% Shredded paper 0.2%Both bagged and loose 20
Rank Popularity Weight Combined MRF T op 7 MRF T op 7 Hit List? (cart tags) (sort study) T op 5 Pre-Sword Post-Sword Plastic Packaging, Plastic Hoses and Hoses and Plastic Plastic bags and 1 including plastic Packaging stretchy or stretchy or Packaging film cups (2) tangly items tangly items Plastic Bags Non-recyclable T o-go cups Plastic Bags Plastic Bags and 2 and Other waste paper and food (4) and Film Film Wrap/Film waste Bottles of Non-recyclable Other waste Biological 3 T o-go Cups Hazardous T extiles Paper (7) waste Chemicals Non- GARBAGE, Paper T owels Food-soiled 4 Wood and C/D recyclable T extiles** including and Napkins paper Paper (7) biological Plastic bags Bottles of Other Plastic Objects Non-recyclable 5 & Wrap/Film Propane tanks Hazardous garbage and Rigid Plastics plastics…? (9) Chemicals Food soiled Food-soiled 6 T extiles Sharps paper and food paper waste** Styrofoam Plastic Bags and Large car 7 (including Propane tanks Wrap/Film parts food service) 21
Clark County’s status 22
Impacts of National Sword on Clark County Increased operational costs Increased bale quality Increased residue Increased domestic end-markets available Nothing has been taken off the recycling list! 23
2017 September/October • Brokers became conservative and market for MWP became uncertain, • MWP began to stockpile • Added at four FTEs to improve bale quality • ~5% to 1.9% contamination • Slowed line. Material still coming in and flowing out doors – bottleneck November • Slowed the sort line from 25 tons per hour to 14 • Diverting nearly all out-of-county tons to other MRFs • Material no longer flowing outside the facility • Added another four FTEs to paper sort lines • Material going to SE Asia instead of China December • MWP became no longer marketable. Creating ONP product instead. • Remaining MWP reprocessed into ONP, or disposed 24
2018 January • Domestic markets reemerged to accept ONP product • 1.1% contamination February • 0.65% contamination – so close! • 10-15% of the paper that was formerly recycled is now landfilled March • Material is all able to be moved • Some disposal of stored bales from when the market disruption first occurred • Possible buyer identified of the 10-15% MWP that used to be recycled 25
Public and Political Perception • Upset to learn recyclables were going to China • China is not to blame • Opened some eyes about the mystical process • Elves come and pick up • Fairies use magic at the facilities to make new items! • Public may be more receptive to “stronger arm” tactics 26
Outreach 27
In the Portland, OR Media-shed Different states Different state agencies Different system models Same waste-shed (mostly) 28
What we are doing in response Now… Upcoming… • Blogs • Inviting local news or radio hosts to come to • App transfer station • Tabling • Help in separating us from Portland and Oregon • Social media • Inspire confidence in the • Challenge system 29
Resilient Recycler Green Neighbors Blog Series
RecycleRight App
Tabling Events
Social Media
In conclusion • Soft approaches are effective too • Great for communities that would be resistant • Who particularly value privacy and property • Use tested models • such as those by the Recycling Partnership • Pilot in your community before rolling out • National Sword may open opportunities to be more strong- armed, but soft is a good start 35
Questions? Kim D. Harless Kim.Harless@clark.wa.gov 360.397.2121 ext. 5957 Clark County Recycling Done Right Campaign 3/29/18 36
Recommend
More recommend
