01-03-1985 Council Packet Special Meeting

Home Browse Search

Priorities Historically, almost all recovery has taken place by hand -separating the wastes where they are generated (such as households and offices), then transpc-ting and selling the recovered materials. Technologically, this process is rela- tively simple and has a good potential for dealing with a substantial percent- age of the region's waste. The main obstacles to implementing source separation have been economic. Separ- ation programs simply have not been able to compete with land disposal with its artificially low costs. Moreover, source separation programs have always depended on the voluntary participation of waste generators, and any cost sav- ings have usually not been large enough to encourage most generators to partici- pate. In addition, there has often been a lack of coordination among different rcycling efforts and sometimes unreliable service. Three types of waste are particularly suited for aggressive source separation region -wide. They are 1) yard wastes such as leaves generated mainly by house- holds and some businesses and institutions; 2) small quantities of hazardous substances discarded by households and commercial and industrial firms exempted under federal and state hazardous waste disposal regulations; and 3) recycl- ables, such as paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, metal, and aluminum, pro- duced by households, and commercial and industrial firms. The benefits of separating these waste materials at the source are many: providing a cleaner, higher -quality reusable product, reducing the potential for damage to process- ing equipment and reducing the cost of disposal at facilities receiving mixed waste. Immediate priority should go to separating yard waste that can be composted and recyclable materials from mixed municipal waste. Indications are that source separation programs could be available throughout most of the region within two to three years. Within five years, enough households and businesses could be participating in waste separation programs to achieve a very substantial reduc- tion in wastes otherwise destined for landfills. Some wastes may be recovered now or could be reused. However, they should not have the same priority for developing source separation services as recycl- ables. Examples include tires, plastics, and demolition and construction debris. Other wastes can contaminate products, damage processing equipment or present special public health and safety problems. As a result, they should be handled and treated separately. These include such items as hazardous sub- stances from households and small commercial or industrial firms. Region -wide recovery services for these components will take longer to implement, perhaps until 1990. By 1990, as much as 20 percent of the total solid waste generated annually could be separated and recovered under a full-scale region -wide effort. Reach- ing this level, however, requires using several measures phased in at different times. Source separation services for recyclables and yard waste for compost- ing must be available region -wide by 1987, and full-scale participation by waste generators must be mandatory by 1988. Source separation services for spe- cial wastes and hazardous substances should be available region -wide by 1990, although services for particular wastes may be provided earlier. All yard waste materials and recyclables must be banned from land disposal after 1990. :' 3