01-03-1985 Council Packet Special Meeting

Home Browse Search

The central activity defined for the Metropolitan Council and the metropolitan counties is to develop and disseminate practical information that waste gener- ators can use about the opportunities fr ,nd benefits of waste reduction tech- niques. The Metropolitan Council should immediately take the lead in waste reduction research and development, an effort that will need close communica- tion with the metropolitan counties as they develop their solid waste master plans. The counties may decide to coordinate this responsibility through the Metropolitan Inter County Association (MICA). Source Separation Service Methods, Recovery Levels and Target Dates The source separation program consists ) separate collection of yard wastes, office paper recycling, drop-off centers -d on -route collection. Projections for participation and recovery rates for t,ise are based on experiences of existing programs in the Twin Citit! Metr;puiitan Area and also from similar programs around the country. The projected participation rates for each of the techniques are listed in Table 4-2 and the regional objectives are listed in Table 4-3. The highest level of convenience for the waste generator is pro- v`. id by on -route collection. Therefore, higher levels of recovery can be expected. The regional totals for source separation programs are 181,000 tons per year (nine percent of the total waste) by 1988 and 319,000 tons (16 per- cent) by 1990. One set of the critical assumptions is the list of materials identified for recovery by source separation (see Table 4-5). This list will be reviewed by the Council annually and revised as necessary to adjust to changing condi- tions. The materials vary by type of program because of the technical con- straints of markets and collection method. This list represents those mate- rials that are commonly collected by existing programs. The list of materials identified for recovery is not intended to be all inclusive rr items that could tti' 'tiLally be recycled. Additional materials that should be considered for i include: plastics, automibile waste oil, automobile batteries, and rt or repairable housewares such as clothing, appliances, and furniture. $pat ials have been left out of the list of materials identified for r, o% -cause of market or legal constraints. Items contaminated in some fashio. r destroyed to the point that they are no longer marketable or reus- able are not identified for recovery by source separation. Other types of m?t rials have the potential to contaminate products, damage processing equipment or present special public health and safety problems. These items include most household hazardous wastes, which should be handled and treated separately. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency plans to conduct a pilot on -route collec- tion program for hazardous wastes. If adequate safety and environmental protec- tion procedures can be assured, these materials could then be identified for recovery and this type of collection should be expanded region -wide. The list of mate. ,Is identified for recovery, plus the list of additional mate- rials that could be recovered, is very extensive. This is in line eith Cou•.il policy that encourages as much of the waste stream as possible be recycled. When developing and revising the list of identified materials, the benefits of a comprehensive source separation program to the region in terms of reduced capital and operating expenditures and environmental impacts must be consid- ered. The state recognized these benefits in the Waste Management Act specifi- 41