Markell and O’Mara Unveil Recycling Effort
Today, Governor Markell and DNREC Secretary Colin O’Mara unveiled their plan to implement a statewide recycling plan that will change the way that Delawareans dispose of recyclable materials.
Recycling would remain voluntary for homes and businesses under the plan, but curbside services and special containers would be universally available. Commercial haulers and municipal governments that collect trash would be required to provide curbside pickups.
Money to help haulers and communities start new recycling programs would come from a non-refundable 5-cent fee now charged as a returnable deposit for smaller glass and plastic beverage containers. Fee proceeds also would pay for marketing and education.
The beauty here is the way that the bottle bill is fixed. We will go away from the 5 cent refundable deposit (for which there are no reliable numbers about actual refunds issued) and instead works to lower the deposit to 2 cents non-refundable. That 2 cents would go to fund the statewide recycling effort.
The effort will remove the logistics of collecting deposits, accepting returns, paying out refunds and transporting the empty’s and accounting for the tens of thousands of nickels in the process. Let’s face it, it sucks trying to get refunds on these deposits. Retailers regularly place restrictions on the quantity, packaging and state of returns. I don’t blame them, the bottles are unweildy in large quantities. As a consumer, I would much rather just toss them in a recycling bin for pickup every other week.
I started doing curbside recycling about a year ago, when my regular waste company started offering it. The ease of single stream recycling makes my recycling bin fill faster than my trash. It is oddly comforting when I take the large can to the curb with only two small kitchen trash bags full of trash. Hopefully we can improve even further, and this plan seems to move in that direction.
Tags: DNREC, Governor Markell, Recycling
I love the mixed stream curbside recycling. Frankly I don’t like segregating glass bottles from the rest for the returns (I’m lazy). I like the idea of just tossing the glass bottles in with the rest of the recyclables.
We have had the mixed stream curbside recycling in the city for a while, and I love it. Just like LG, it has greatly reduced our regular trash output.
So, living in a town with curbside now, how will this affect me? Might I hope for lowered costs, perchance?
Good question, Brooke. Currently, New Castle County has the most widely available curbside recycling program, so some of this effort is just for expanding that down south.
But your deposit on beer and soda will drop…
General rule for me, don’t expect the fees to drop, be happy if they don’t rise.
the city recycle program DOES offer coupons and stuff based (i think) on your household weight of recyclables. you could consider that a lowered cost.
How does this assist me who brings all my own recyclables to the bins less than a 1/2 mile from my house? will i get a tax credit? or will i continue to subsidize those who refuse to do it on their own or dont feel the need to pay someone to do something that takes a total of 3 minutes a week?
When my commercial hauler stopped picking up yard waste, I asked them how much they were going to reduce my rates. We had a good laugh together.
So, basically, the bottle bill is repealed and replaced with a 2 cent tax on bottles. Fine. I usually recycle the bottles rather than return them so I am getting a tax cut.
The more I drink, the more my taxes are cut!
But where will that tax money go?
Not to commercial haulers, I hope.
And what community recycling programs are they talking about? What happens to the current drop boxes?
Actually I have curbside available from my private hauler for a fee, but I won’t pay it. They are already getting far too much free work out of me by requiring home separation and storage of recyclables. I drop off recycling in the free drop boxes while doing other errands.
If the drop boxes are taken away I will probably go back to chucking everything in the garbage again rather than pay a fee.
The City recycling program also pays Recycle Bank now something like $150K (+/-) per year to cover the portion of their costs not covered by the amount of recycling done in the city. This is still cheaper than the tipping fees, I think. The biggest challenge in the city, I think, has been educating people on what can and cannot be recycled. But this was complicated by the fact that the City decided to make one of the two pick up days a pick up recycling day. So for Wilmington, I am hoping that their share of the fees collected will go to paying the current gap charges and maybe to getting some additional education done to encourage more recycling.
So let me get this straight: there’s now a 2% tax on bottles to fund a recycling plan that does nothing more than the subsidized DSWA plan we have now. What am I missing?
Make that 2c not 2%.
Personally, I have had the exact opposite experience of you, anon. I found that I chucked way more stuff in the trash when I had to drive the stuff out to the drop boxes. And with the pace of my life, I was only recycling every other week (or less) and it was generally not on my way to anything else, so it was a separate trip.
Now I pay $5/month and recycle a volume of about 100 gallons per month.
What I would really like is a more efficient method of hauling it all away, instead of 4 different haulers coming through my neighborhood, making noise, wearing out roads and spewing exhaust.
Well, I’m paying a ridiculous upcharge now to subsidize my neighbors’ illusion that they’re protecting the environment (because I don’t buy much that’s recyclable) and I would hope any further government support for recycling took notice of the fact that early adopters have carried the burden thus far. If they’re just planning to move money further south, can’t say I’m excited about that.
Yeah, we have trash trucks grinding down our street six days a week. Freedom of choice and all that.
I heard (possibly an urban legend) that there was some law or regulation preventing communities or civic associations to band together for a common hauler. Anybody know if this is true? You never see it happening, so maybe there is something to it.
Ooh, a. price, I had forgotten about the coupons. I love those! We’ve received coupons for 5.00 off at Happy Harry’s and 5.00, 10.00, and 20.00 off at Acme, as well as discounts at restaurants.
And I agree with LG *yawn* again. Since mixed stream, curb pick up recycling we recycle a LOT more – and the drop off recycling bins were 3 blocks from my house. I know, I should be ashamed. But this is soooooo convenient!
That may be true. I will check with one of my sources.
What we could really do is sell franchise districts to the haulers to minimize the breadth of coverage, but depth of customer base. Perhaps 2 franchises awarded per district…
I am always going out for local errands (kid chauffeuring, groceries, etc) so it is no big deal to throw the recycling in the minivan and drop it in the bin.
I have a large rollaway bin and after I started taking recycling to the bins, I was able to cut back from 2-day to 1-day per week pickup. They give only a small discount for 1-day pickup, but combined with a 10% discount for paying up front, my hauler costs me $271/yr. I’m not really interested in extra fees.
I’m with you pandora on the convenience factor.
anon, my neighborhood has tried to get a common hauler, but the neighbors can’t agree on which one. So we have trash trucks Mon through Fri.
Gee, and here I was complaining that the city lost one regular trash day – swapped out for a recycling pick-up. Seems to me that trash pick up should be under government control – covered by taxes *gasp!* – since this seems to be a case of too much choice. Trash trucks Monday thru Friday? Are you kidding me?
but the neighbors can’t agree on which one
Hmm… there needs to be an RFP process and competitive bidding. Maybe the rumored regulation has something to do with forbidding competive bidding.
But even if you get a bid winner and everyone signs up, there will always be someone who wants a different hauler.
I guess what’s missing is legislation that allows a community to forbid unauthorized haulers.
Yes, let’s have trash collection under government control since they do such a marvelous job at say, snow removal.
The City of Wilmington did a fantastic job of removing the snow on our streets. I also don’t have to find a trash hauler, nor do I have trash trucks in my neighborhood 5 days a week, nor do I receive a separate bill. So yeah, Arthur, government does some things better. And, IMO, trash removal is one of the basic foundations of a civilized society.
What planet hail you from, arthur? Many places have public trash, sewer, snow removal, road repair… it’s one of those “now that we aren’t three weeks by muleback from the trading post” amenities.
My objection to my hauling contract is that it was poorly negotiated by people I don’t elect. If they were answerable to me, they’d do a better job.
Seems to me that trash pick up should be under government control – covered by taxes *gasp!* – since this seems to be a case of too much choice
Call me a LINO if you want, but I don’t really see a need for The Great Government Take-Over of Waste Management (**as he tries to seed a conservative blog somewhere 🙂 **). At least not in the suburbs. I can, however, see the a rationale for limiting the number of trash trucks on city streets, though. And even though I guess I wouldn’t mind having one fewer bill to pay, except for my previous exception, I don’t see a need for it. I advocate government intervention when I think it can do better than the open market, and I don’t see that here. Besides, you want to tell the Tony Soprano-types that the government is taking over their “business”?
LOL, Scott! Here’s the thing… I never even think about my trash pick-up. Never. It’s like magic! I just put it out on the curb and it’s gone the next morning. 😉
Sussex County recycling = Burn Barrel.
Actually, I was recycling (on my dime) before it was trendy, or even *encouraged* by our benevolent dictatorship (DNREC).
2 cents deposit = another victory for big business.
Atta Boy, Markell.
“… I never even think about my trash pick-up. Never. It’s like magic! I just put it out on the curb and it’s gone the next morning. ;-)”
Must be some kind of city dweller mentality. Down here, in your summer playground, apparently we’re more in touch with the environment.
Killing the deposit is a gift to everyone in the retail chain except the distributors, who pocket most of the nickels (the commonly accepted estimate is $13 million a year’s worth). It’s also a 3-cent gift to retailers, none of whom will actually drop the price to reflect the change. And I’ll be damned if I pay $5 a month to lower my trash hauler’s tipping fees.
I’m going to stick with ditching my trash in someone else’s dumpster. Although I like and approve of the idea of expanded recycling, I am too forgetful to put it out on time. Much easier to ditch it in a commercial dumpster after close.
Markell’s proposal looks promising, economically and politically.
This is a big proposal with lots of moving parts. When all of you are done with your instant analysis, come on over. I will provide a more thorough review of the economics and politics of the plan.
“I will provide a more thorough review of the economics and politics of the plan.”
Can I bring my empty bottles? I want to unload them while the price is up.
“… come on over. I will provide a more thorough review of the economics and politics of the plan.”
Can I bring my empty bottles? I want to unload them while the price is up.
“The beauty here is the way that the bottle bill is fixed. We will go away from the 5 cent refundable deposit (for which there are no reliable numbers about actual refunds issued) and instead works to lower the deposit to 2 cents non-refundable. That 2 cents would go to fund the statewide recycling effort.”
I agree, on the surface it looks good. My only concern is that it’s obvious now that people are somewhat reluctant to return containers at the current rate, and that they will not even bother when the rate is reduced. Frankly, it’s a toss up now whether to return or recycle. I envision more recyclables going to the landfills than before this plan.
The real unknown at this point is what consumers (via private haulers) will have to pay for curbside recycling. The bottle fee will subsidize some portion of that, but I don’t think anyone knows what that will be. The price haulers can get for recyclables fluctuates and is right now fairly low. The good news is that Wilmington has been doing curbside city-wide recycling for awhile and the diversion rate is in the neighborhood of 35% which is quite good.
I think that the motivator for curbside recycling is going to be the consumer cost. If this is more than the DSWA $6/month I think that this plan may have some difficulty.
But as Tommywonk has pointed out there are costs increases on the horizon.
Go read the whole post!
There are cost increases on the horizon now whether there is recycling or not. Recycling — in theory — will slow the rate of those increases at least by avoiding the need for a new landfill or other disposal method. But every landfill has a set of fixed operating costs and those costs can change depending upon regulatory issues and the need to plan for a next generation. Most of those costs do not go away if you dump less. Recycling is not quite free yet, either.
The projected cost of replacing Cherry Island is funny — that number is in the ball park of what the current expansion will cost. Besides, I think that there are some partisans in government who would like to see Cherry Island replaced with an incinerator.