sorting it all out - carolina recycling association...sorting it all out: mitch kessler kessler...

Sorting It All Out:

Mitch Kessler Kessler Consulting, Inc.

CRA’s 25th Annual Conference & Trade Show March 25th, 2015

What’s in Your Garbage And

Why You Should Care

If you don’t measure it,

you can’t manage it.

Why Should You Care?

•  Solid waste planning and management

•  Benchmark/gauge program effectiveness

•  Targeted education and outreach •  Potential cost savings •  Reporting requirements •  Certification programs (i.e., LEED )

Why Measure?

Types of Studies • Waste

• Manual sorting

• Visual audit

•  Recycling •  Pre-processing

•  Post-processing

•  Sectors •  Residential •  Commercial •  Institutional •  Public areas

• Municipal •  City/County •  State

•  Facility specific

Generator and Sectors

Solid Waste Variables

Population Policies

Types of Haulers

Materials Collected Tons Processed

Politics

Geographic Location

Service Areas

Revenue Share Integration of Services

Public Participation Tip Fees

Timeframe of Study Recycling Market

Pitfalls of Comparing Data • Diverse demographic, collection, and

processing factors •  Non-standardized information •  Varying reporting practices •  Inconsistent definitions and methodology •  Numerous local factors

≠

Local Data Matters

Recyclable  Paper,  18.6%  

Recyclable  Containers,  

10.1%  

Poten9ally  Recyclable,  

7.5%  C&D,  14.8%  

Other,  19.4%  

Organics,  29.7%  

Actual City data

Recyclable  Paper,  25.2%  

Recyclable  

Containers,  6.5%  Poten9all

y  Recyclable,  7.3%  

Other,  27.2%  

[CATEGORY  

NAME],    [VALUE]  

EPA data

EPA Paper: $1.6 million Containers: $1.4 million

City Paper: $1.2 million Containers: $2.2 million

Value of recyclables in 100,000 tons of waste

Pre-processing • Municipality/public •  Recyclables delivered •  Supply value •  Contamination

Measuring Recyclables Post-processing • Operator • Means & methods •  System efficiencies • What’s in residuals? • Market for recyclables

The Tale of Three Cities

0.0%  

5.0%  

10.0%  

15.0%  

20.0%  

25.0%  

30.0%  

Newspaper   Cardboard   Other  Paper   Metal  cans   Glass   Plas9cs   Contamina9on  

%  in  Recycling  Stream

71% more

142% more 131% more

City 1 (Green): $107.64/ton City 2 (Yellow): $90.14/ton City 3 (Blue): $88.01/ton

Educating Schools on Diversion Recyclable  Paper,  7.7%  

Recyclable  Containers,  

3.2%  

Food  Waste,  20.1%  

Asep9c  Containers,  

10.1%  

Other  Waste,  58.9%  

Elementary  Recyclable  Paper,  16.0%  

[CATEGORY  NAME]  [VALUE]  

Food  Waste,  12.4%  

[CATEGORY  NAME]  [VALUE]  

Other  Waste,  60.0%  

Middle  

Recyclable  Paper,  29.3%  

Recyclable  Containers,  

6.3%  

Food  Waste,  4.4%  

Asep9c  Containers,  

0.8%  

Other  Waste,  59.1%  

High  

The Changing Waste Stream

 Material  Category   1994  Study   2001  Study   2014  Study   %  change  

 Newspaper   4.7%   4.2%   2.0%   -­‐57.8%  

 Plas9c  BoYles   0.6%   1.1%   2.5%   346.4%  

 C&D  Debris   27.8%   23.8%   17.6%   -­‐36.6%  

 Yard  Waste   18.5%   28.8%   32.0%   72.7%  

 Food  Waste   4.7%   5.2%   6.8%   46.2%  

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Rec

yclin

g R

ate

Setting Achievable Goals

Current Recycling/Composting (20.5%)

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Rec

yclin

g R

ate

Setting Achievable Goals

All Accepted Recyclables (19.6%)

Current Recycling/Composting (20.5%)

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Rec

yclin

g R

ate

Setting Achievable Goals

All Accepted Recyclables (19.6%)

Current Recycling/Composting (20.5%)

Potential Recyclables (7.4%)

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Rec

yclin

g R

ate

Setting Achievable Goals

All Accepted Recyclables (19.6%)

All C&D (14.6%)

Current Recycling/Composting (20.5%)

Potential Recyclables (7.4%)

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Rec

yclin

g R

ate

Setting Achievable Goals

All Accepted Recyclables (19.6%)

All C&D (14.6%)

All Organics (18.6%)

Current Recycling/Composting (20.5%)

Potential Recyclables (7.4%)

Value of a Comp Study/Why You Should Care?

•  Real actionable data

•  Benchmarking and reporting

•  Evaluate programs

•  Identify future recycling opportunities

•  Focused outreach

•  Certification programs

•  Environmental impact

What’s Best for Your Community ?

• Focus on YOUR waste and YOUR program’s needs & objectives

•  Identify YOUR objectives • Understand industry trends

• Remember… All solid waste is LOCAL

Mitch Kessler 813-971-8333

mk@kesconsult.com

“Seek first to understand, then to be understood.”

-Stephen Covey