• No results found

Hennepin County: A national leader in recycling and diverting waste from landfills. Hennepin County. Solid Waste Management.

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Hennepin County: A national leader in recycling and diverting waste from landfills. Hennepin County. Solid Waste Management."

Copied!
69
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Hennepin County

Solid Waste

Management

Master Plan

Hennepin County: A national leader in recycling

and diverting waste from landfills.

(2)
(3)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Waste Generation and Composition ... 4

II. Developing the Plan ... 5

A. State Waste Management Policy Plan and Regional Plan ... 5

B. Hennepin County Master Plan ... 5

C. Public Engagement Process for Developing the Master Plan ...6

III. Existing System ... 7

A. Waste Managed ... 7

B. Environmental Education and Outreach ... 8

C. Source Reduction and Reuse ... 8

D. Recycling ... 9

1. Residential Curbside ...10

2. Commercial ...10

3. Multifamily ...10

E. Organics...11

F. Event and Away from Home Waste ...12

G. Household Hazardous Waste and Problem Materials ...12

H. MSW Collection and Solid Waste Facilities...13

I. Resource Recovery ...13 J. Landfilling ...14 K. Other Wastes ...15 IV. Trends ...15 V. Strategies ...16 A. Introduction ...16

B. Education and Outreach ...17

C. Source Reduction and Reuse ...18

D. Recycling ...21

E. Residential Curbside Recycling ...22

F. Commercial Recycling ...24

G. Multifamily Recycling ...26

H. Organics Recovery ...28

I. Event and Away from Home Waste ...31

J. Household Hazardous Waste and Problem Materials ...33

K. Resource Recovery ...34 L. Landfilling ...36 M. Non-MSW ...36 N. Role of Others ...38 O. Long-Term Strategies ...39 Appendices

Appendix A: Waste Generation Projection ...A1 Appendix B: Waste Composition: Hennepin County and

Rational Energies Study ...B1 Appendix C: Hennepin County Ordinances Relating to

Solid Waste ...C1 Appendix D: Hennepin County Department of

Environmental Services Budget ...D1 Appendix E: Map of Solid Waste Facilities in

Hennepin County ...E1 Appendix F: Fees and Charges at Hennepin County Solid

Waste Facilities...F1 Appendix G: Residential Recycling Funding Policy ...G1 Appendix H: Documents submitted to MPCA ...H1

Hennepin County Solid Waste Management Master Plan

(4)

This Master Plan is intended to guide waste management in the county through 2030. Most of the strategies focus on meeting the 2015 objectives established by the state in the Policy Plan. Other strategies will lay the foundation for achieving long-term goals. Progress on implementing strategies will be reviewed regularly, and revisions and new strategies will be developed as appropriate to con-tinue progress towards achieving the primary outcomes.

I. Waste Generation and Composition

There are 1.2 million residents and thousands of busi-nesses in Hennepin County. Each and every person and business generates waste. In general, waste generation has increased along with population and job growth. Historical trends show that the amount of waste tends to increase as the economy grows and decrease when the economy contracts. The financial crisis in 2008 led to a decline in economic activity and rising unemployment. The recession and continued economic stagnation have resulted in a decrease in waste generation. Despite this short-term reduction in waste generation, generation of municipal solid waste (MSW) in Hennepin County is pro-jected to grow 25 percent by 2030. The propro-jected genera-tion of MSW is contained in Appendix A.

Hennepin County partnered with Rational Energies to complete a waste composition study on MSW delivered to the county’s Brooklyn Park Transfer Station. Results of the study are summarized below. More detailed results by sector are contained in Appendix B.

Plastics 14% Metals 6% Organic Waste 33% MSW Composition in 2011 Paper 14% Bulky Waste 12% Other 21%

Introduction

Hennepin County’s Solid Waste Management Master Plan (“Master Plan”) was developed by the Department of Environmental Services with valuable input derived from an extensive public engagement process. This plan dem-onstrates the county’s commitment to conserve natural resources, protect the environment and ensure public health and safety. The county is a national and regional leader in environmental management, and the Master Plan was developed with the goal of maintaining and strengthening this leadership position.

Hennepin County is required by state statute to prepare, either individually or jointly as a region, a revised county solid waste plan that aligns with the goals and policies in the Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan (“Policy Plan”). In response to the Policy Plan, the Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board has developed a Regional Solid Waste Master Plan (“Regional Master Plan”) that outlines the strategies metro counties will use to achieve the outcomes identified in the Policy Plan. The County Master Plan details the strategies the county will pursue in managing waste to achieve regional outcomes. This plan was adopted by the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners on April 10, 2012. It was developed to be consistent with the board’s mission “to enhance the health, safety and quality of life of our residents and communities in a respectful, efficient and fiscally respon-sible way.” It is also consistent with the Department of Environmental Services’ (DES) mission of “protecting the environment and conserving resources for future gen-erations” and overarching strategic goal that “Hennepin County’s environment is preserved for future generations.” Part I of this plan describes waste generation in the county and the composition of that waste. Part II provides the context in which this plan was developed by describ-ing statutory requirements, the role of the metropolitan region and county responsibilities, and the public en-gagement process used to gather input. Part III discusses the existing integrated solid waste management system along with the programs and activities carried out by the county. Part IV provides a brief description of the trends that will affect the amount and composition of solid waste to be managed into the future. Part V sets forth the strategies the county plans to implement to meet state goals. Appendices at the end of the plan provide addi-tional detail about the solid waste management system.

(5)

II. Developing the Plan

A. Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan and Regional Solid Waste Master Plan

Recognizing both the need to reduce waste and the unmet opportunity to use waste as a resource, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency updated its Policy Plan to provide a framework for change by establishing higher goals and describing tools for achieving objec-tives through 2030.

The Policy Plan sets forth a vision for sustainability for the metropolitan area solid waste management system: “A sustainable community minimizes waste, prevents pollution, promotes efficiency, reduces greenhouse gas emissions, saves energy and develops resources to revitalize local economies. The integrated waste man-agement system is an essential component of the infrastructure of a sustainable community.”

The overarching message of the Policy Plan is that fundamental change – brought about through greater accountability and utilization of more-effective tools – is necessary among the stakeholders responsible for solid waste generation and management. The Policy Plan promotes aggressive goals that support the upper end of the waste management hierarchy. Quantifiable objectives establish minimum standards and encourage higher achievement.

Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan MSW Management System Objectives

Hennepin County adopted the goals established by the MPCA in its Policy Plan with the exception that the county has an organics recovery goal of 6 percent by 2015 and by 2020.

Hennepin County is required by state statute to prepare, either individually or jointly as a region, a revised county solid waste plan that aligns with the goals and policies in the Policy Plan. These requirements are specified in Minn. Stat. §473.803. Following MPCA approval of the updated Policy Plan on April 6, 2011, a one-year process began to update the regional and county master plans that imple-ment the Policy Plan’s vision and objectives.

The Regional Master Plan was developed by the Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board, a joint powers board of six metropolitan counties that includes Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey and Washington coun-ties. It provides an overall regional vision and includes high-level regional and partnership strategies to enhance solid waste management into the future.

B. Hennepin County Solid Waste Management Master Plan

The County Master Plan details individual strategies the county will use to manage waste, consistent with and complementary to regional strategies. The Master Plan should not be viewed as a standalone document, but instead as part of an integrated set of planning materials that include the Policy Plan, the Regional Master Plan and the county’s forthcoming workplan. The workplan will outline specific initiatives derived from the foundational strategies set forth in the Master Plan. Together these documents provide a statewide, regional and county-specific view of the solid waste management landscape, based on a long-term vision and short-term strategies that will enable the county to fully achieve its solid waste management objectives.

Management Method 2015 2020 2025 2030 Source Reduction and Reuse 1-2% 2-4% 3-5% 4-6% Recycling 45-48% 47-51% 49-54% 54-60% Organics Recovery 3-6% 4-8% 6-12% 9-15% Resource Recovery 32-34% 32-33% 30-31% 24-28%

(6)

The following key findings informed the development of these strategies:

Residential Recycling

• Residents want less sorting.

• Forty percent would recycle more if they had a larger container or weekly pickup.

• Could be recycling more paper and plastic bottles. • Most want organics recycling collection and to recycle

more kinds of plastics.

• More education is needed – clear but simple information.

Multifamily

• Minimal enforcement of current requirement to offer services.

• Property managers don’t perceive a problem with their recycling program.

• Limited education provided by property managers. • Property managers would like help with education

and signage.

• Public would like to see more done at multifamily properties.

Commercial/Businesses

• Business owners don’t perceive a problem with their recycling program.

• Limited actions have been taken to increase recycling. • Received little to no technical assistance on improving

their programs.

• Less than one-quarter think a change in the solid waste management tax would affect what they recycle. • Strong interest in business certification program. • Favor education and incentives, rather than mandates. • Public would like to see more done to improve recycling

at work.

C. Public Engagement Process for Developing the Master Plan

State statute requires each county to establish a solid waste management advisory committee to aid in the preparation of the County Master Plan. A committee comprised of 11 members helped develop the 2004 plan. For the development of this plan, the county decided to go above and beyond state requirements by hosting a comprehensive public engagement process that reached many more stakeholders.

Summary of Public Engagement Process

The county gathered feedback on how to improve recy-cling from 1,900 participants at public meetings, events and community forums and from online and in-person surveys. Participants included residents, representa-tives from businesses, city environmental commission members, education partners, school staff, multi-family property managers, haulers, recycling companies and municipal recycling coordinators.

Based on the feedback the county received, the following strategies have wide support:

• Standardize materials collected and education materials. • More technical assistance and support to municipal

recycling coordinators, businesses, schools, multifam-ily property owners and away-from-home venues to improve recycling.

• Expand organics recycling programs and plastic recycling opportunities.

• Improve education efforts.

Action Participants Timeline

Stakeholder feedback process

conducted by consultant 176 stakeholders including recycling coordinators, businesses, education partners, schools, multi-family, haulers and recycling processors

Jan. – Mar. 2010

Interview of city recycling

coordinators 28 recycling program administrators Nov. 2010 – Jan. 2011 Regional chamber of

commerce survey 237 businesses Dec. 2010 Community forums 69 highly engaged residents from

Medina, Bloomington and Crystal Feb. – Mar. 2011 Presentations to city environmental

commissions HRG Board, Golden Valley, Champlin, Edina, Eden Prairie, Brooklyn Park Feb. – Mar. 2011 Booths at community events 10 events – Earth fairs, yard and

gar-den expos, 275 surveys completed Feb. – Mar. 2011 Sustainable Neighborhood

Conferences 83 local government representatives and residents Apr. 2011 Online survey Residents – 961 surveys completed Mar. – Apr. 2011 Multi-family survey in Bloomington 29 property managers Nov. – Apr. 2011

(7)

City Recycling Staff/Environmental Commissions

• Supportive of the county’s efforts to improve recycling and composting and decrease landfilling.

• Standardization would be beneficial to reduce confu-sion, increase participation and improve recycling rates. • Want education before enforcement.

• Mixed reactions to mandates, county or state would need to mandate changes.

• Enforcement of multifamily requirements is minimal. Desire a stronger role from the county to improve mul-tifamily recycling.

• Supportive of modifying the Residential Recycling Funding Policy and expanding the use of recycling grant funding to support organics programs. • Support including multifamily units and small

busi-nesses with curbside collection, if feasible.

• Identified needs for cities include technical assistance, funding or help offsetting the costs of collection, ad-ditional staff, and educational resources.

III. Existing Waste Management System

Under state law, counties are tasked with managing municipal solid waste. This section begins with an over-view of waste collection in the county before turning to a discussion of county efforts to reduce waste and manage it resourcefully. These efforts start at the top of the waste management hierarchy and include a robust education and outreach program; promotion of source reduction and reuse; recycling and organics programs at home, events and away-from-home venues; proper disposal of household hazardous wastes and problem materials; resource recovery; landfilling and finally management of non-MSW.

A. Waste Managed

Over 90 percent of the waste generated in Hennepin County is collected by private haulers. In general, haulers choose where to deliver the waste they collect. In 2010, almost two thirds of the waste generated stayed in the private sector of the waste management system. The county retains active oversight over the efforts of the private sector by en-forcing several ordinances, which include the licensing of haulers and solid waste facilities.

solid waste is found in Appendix C. To meet state goals, the county also operates solid waste facilities, uses finan-cial incentives and provides services such as education and technical assistance.

Hennepin County operates its solid waste programs as an enterprise fund. In 2012, the county budgeted ap-proximately $54 million to operate its Department of Environmental Services. The program areas supported by the enterprise fund include solid waste, waste reduction and recycling, household hazardous waste, environmental protection and administration. Appendix D describes the primary sources of revenue and the principal expenses.

Delivered to county facilities 36%

Mostly private but managed by city recycling contracts 7%

Stays in the private sector 57%

Waste Management System

Tons collected, %, 2010 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2015 Target To ns M SW M an ag ed (T ho us and s)

Tons MSW Managed(Thousands of Tons)

Waste to Energy

Organics Recycling

MSW Landfilling

What's Left in the Garbage Can

Results from recovery rate studies

Organics 34% Trash 46%

Household Hazardous Waste / Problems

(8)

C. Source Reduction and Reuse

Hennepin County has worked with over 100 community organizations and awarded $785,000 in funding over the past 10 years through the Community POWER (Partners on Waste Education and Reduction) and Networks pro-grams. Grants help community organizations and schools conduct waste reduction, toxicity reduction and recycling education projects. The county organizes an annual Choose to Reuse Campaign to promote reuse opportuni-ties with over 80 reuse organizations participating and 100,000 coupon books distributed.

Hennepin County operates Free Product Centers at its two permanent recycling facilities where usable products brought to the drop-off facilities for disposal are made available to the public free of charge. To support innova-tion and the creainnova-tion of successful, financially viable waste diversion programs, the county has sponsored reuse proj-ects at county facilities, where items are separated from the trash and re-marketed. In addition, the county has supported the Green Institute’s deconstruction program to divert demolition materials from landfills, with wood, household goods, building materials and shingles divert-ed by the Green Institute to be sold at the Reuse Center. The county has several internal initiatives that cover both recycling and source reduction and reuse. These include the green products initiative, environmentally preferable purchasing and the Lead-by-Example Incentive Fund. In 2010, 41 percent of the waste generated in Hennepin

County was managed through recycling and organics recovery. However, 31 percent of waste was still managed by landfilling, which ranks lowest on the waste manage-ment hierarchy established by the state. The graph on previous page shows tons of MSW managed by each method for the past five years and the targets for 2015. Residential recovery rate studies show there is consider-able opportunity to recover more recyclconsider-ables and organ-ics from the garbage (What’s Left in the Garbage Can, previous page). Over half of what is thrown away is actu-ally recyclable, including organics.

B. Environmental Education and Outreach

County efforts to reduce waste and manage it resource-fully begin with a robust education and outreach program. Efforts to deliver public education go beyond building awareness by providing tools for residents to take action and make environmentally-responsible changes in behavior. The following is a brief list of activities undertaken in 2011:

• Partnered with community groups, through the Community POWER and the Networks program, to implement environmental education projects that result in behavior changes among their audiences. • Implemented education campaigns focused on reuse,

recycling, organics and household hazardous waste. • Shared resources and successes through Green Notes

and Green Partners monthly e-newsletters and press releases.

• Developed resources such as factsheets, brochures, newsletter articles and toolkits for distribution at events and through community partners to educate residents on environmental issues.

• Accessed research and education expertise through the Hennepin-University partnership to develop more effective educational campaigns and programs. • Used trained volunteers to implement

community-Save cash! Save the environment! Get great stuff!

Great stuff...

Great values...

Offers from local reuse retailers. Hurry! Coupons valid October 1 to November 30, 2011

(9)

D. Recycling

This section describes general programs and strategies that have broad application across the entire recycling initiative – specific programs are covered in following sections. Hennepin County does not provide for the col-lection of recycling from residents or businesses. However, to incentivize recycling, the county created Ordinance 15, which establishes a solid waste management fee on garbage service. The residential rate is 9 percent and the commercial rate is 14.5 percent.

The county operates two drop-off centers for residents and businesses:

• Hennepin County Recycling Center/Transfer Station in Brooklyn Park

• South Hennepin Recycling and Problem Waste Drop-off Center in Bloomington

Although the primary purpose of the facilities is to accept HHW and problems materials and, in the case of Brooklyn Park, to serve as a transfer station, these locations provide an option for recycling as well.

The recycling centers accept common recyclables from homeowners and businesses that self-haul their materials. In partnership with PPL Industries, the county developed one of the first mattress recycling programs in the United States. The program recovered the foam, metal, cotton and wood from over 7,000 mattresses collected at the Brooklyn Park Transfer Station and through curbside pick up in Minneapolis in 2010.

Internally, the county began collecting office paper at the Government Center in 1974. The in-house recycling program has now expanded to all county owned facilities, many leased locations, all 41 Hennepin County libraries and the Hennepin County Medical Center. The county’s Lead-by-Example Incentive Fund grant program supports county departments in implementing innovative, internal waste reduction and recycling projects.

In 2001 the county board passed a resolution supporting environmentally preferable purchasing and waste reduc-tion. The county worked with other agencies to write an Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Guide and incor-porated environmentally preferable components into county contracts. The county also implemented a Green Products Initiative with Office Depot for the purchase of office supplies that automatically substitutes more envi-ronmentally friendly office supply products. More than 50 percent of products since purchased have been green products, with no extra cost to the county.

 

Office Depot Business Review

County purchases in 2010 Recycled Products 53% Other 47%

(10)

1. Residential Curbside Recycling

In 1986 Hennepin County passed Ordinance 13, which required cities to meet a recycling goal of 16 percent. Each city was responsible for adopting, implementing and enforcing a source separation ordinance. Ordinance 13 required reporting and contained consequences for not meeting the standard. Today this goal has been exceeded and curbside recycling collection service is available to all single family households in cities within Hennepin County. All household structures up to fourplexes are col-lected curbside and many five- to eight-unit structures are collected curbside as well.

Most cities enter into a contract with a recycling hauler to provide service. Four cities – Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Richfield and St. Anthony – have an open system where the resident is responsible for making recycling arrange-ments with the hauler. Several cities offer special recycling drop-off days or community clean up events where mate-rials are collected for recycling as well as disposal. Perma-nent drop-off facilities are also available in a few cities.

Recyclables are delivered to a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF), where contaminants are removed and materials are sorted by type and grade. Three MRFs are currently operating in the county, owned by Allied Waste, Waste Management and Eureka Recycling. Randy’s operates a MRF in Delano, which is in Wright County just across the western border of Hennepin County.

The county provides financial support and technical assis-tance to municipalities for curbside programs. The county continues to pass through 100 percent of the state’s SCORE funding ($2.9 million in 2010) to municipalities with grants for curbside and other residential recycling and waste re-duction programs. To receive a grant, cities are required to

2. Commercial Recycling

Commercial recycling tonnage, which accounts for 77 percent of the county’s recycling, was last estimated in 1993 and has since been adjusted annually based on em-ployment data. Recyclables from the commercial sector are collected by private waste haulers and delivered to private MRFs to be processed and marketed. Ordinance 15 provides an incentive to recycle by establishing a 14.5 percent solid waste management fee on garbage collec-tion. Recycling in the commercial sector has not been the primary focus of county initiatives and resources, but the county has provided technical assistance to businesses to reduce waste and improve recycling by conducting waste audits and offering online resources. The county has also provided funding for the collection of plastic bags through a program called “It’s in the Bag.”

3. Multi-Family Recycling

Similar to the commercial sector, the multi-family sector has not been the primary focus of county initiatives and resources. However, the county has worked with cities to promote recycling in multi-family units and test different methods to encourage residents to recycle. The county has also developed promotional materials in several dif-ferent languages to help educate residents with diverse cultural backgrounds.

Municipalities were required to pass ordinances in the early 1990s that required owners of multi-family housing to provide the opportunity to recycle for their residents. However, these ordinances are difficult to enforce and have fairly nominal penalties for violations.

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Residential Curbside Recycling

Tons by year Recycling by Sector Percent of tons in 2010 Residential 23% Commercial 77%

(11)

There are many challenges to improving multi-family recycling rates. Buildings can have sporadic recycling collection, and those that do have recycling programs often experience low participation and high contami-nation rates. Like the commercial sector, multi-family recycling is difficult to measure. While it is not commercial, it is often collected by haulers along with commercial accounts. At the same time, it does not have the charac-teristics of single-family curbside recycling. Residents of multi-family housing typically move more frequently and therefore have difficulty keeping informed of programs that vary by building. Educational materials must address cultural diversity and be developed in appropriate languages and formats.

E. Organics Recovery

Hennepin County is a leader in organics programs to recover food waste and non-recyclable paper. Through education and outreach, grants and technical assistance, the county has implemented and supported organics recycling programs in nearly 120 schools, numerous

Our

building

recycles

Paper

Recycle:

• Mail, office and school papers • Magazines and catalogs • Newspapers and inserts • Phone books

• Shredded paper in a closed paper bag • Boxes –

Cereal, cracker, pasta and cake mix boxes Shoe boxes, gift boxes and

electronics boxes Boxes from toothpaste, medications

and other toiletries Cardboard No:

• Pizza boxes, egg cartons or other paper soiled with food • Boxes from refrigerated or frozen foods • Gift wrap

Plastic

Recycle:

• Milk and juice jugs • Water, soda and juice bottles • Ketchup and salad dressing bottles • Dishwashing bottles and

detergent jugs • Shampoo, soap and lotion bottles No:

• Plastic bags – recycle at the grocery store • Containers that held

hazardous products, such as motor oil

Glass

Recycle:

• Food and beverage bottles and jars No:

• Window glass or mirrors • Drinking glasses, mugs or vases • Containers that held hazardous products, such as nail polish

Metal

Recycle:

• Food and beverage cans • Aluminum foil No: • Aerosol cans • Containers that held hazardous

products, such as automotive fluids Questions?

Contact your building manager or visit www.hennepin.us/apartmentsrecycle

Preparation:

• Empty and rinse bottles and cans • Flatten boxes

Containers are located:

Hennepin County

Environmental Services 612-348-3777 www.hennepin.us/apartmentsrecycle

businesses and more than 5,000 households in nine cities. The county is also supporting several pilot projects in Minneapolis neighborhoods. If a curbside organics collection program is not available, residents can reduce waste by participating in backyard composting. Over 22,000 compost bins have been distributed to residents to encourage the recycling of food waste into compost at their homes.

The county provides $300,000 annually in Waste Abate-ment Incentive Grants to cities, schools and other public organizations for innovative reuse, recycling and com-posting programs. Since 2000 the county has awarded over $1.7 million for this purpose. Of that amount, $1.2 million has gone to support collection of organic waste for recycling into compost.

Hennepin County also offers a reduced tipping fee of $15 per ton for organics delivered to the county’s Brook-lyn Park Transfer Station (BPTS). Because the tipping fee for garbage is $47 per ton at BPTS, there is an incentive to save money by managing organics separately from garbage. Brooklyn Park Transfer Station now accepts or-ganics for free from residents and small businesses. To support other approaches to organics recovery the county has provided $50,000 annually to Second Harvest since 1998 for food collections from wholesale produce suppliers for distribution to food shelves. The county is also collaborating with the University of Florida, the St. Paul Port Authority and others to assess the feasibility of processing organics by anaerobic digestion. These efforts build on existing collections of food waste for feeding livestock by Endres Processing and area hog farmers.

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000 12,000

Food for Thought

(12)

F. Event and Away from Home Waste

The county has provided funding for the Message in a Bottle program to increase away from home recycling of bottles and cans at gas stations. The county also promotes GreenGatherings, a guide created by Rethink Recycling to help with the greening of events of all sizes. Resources offered include planning guides, case studies, helpful links and more. The county supports green events by making portable recycling units available for recycling

and organics collection at events. These recycling units have proven very successful in recovering clean materials and aiding litter control at events held away from home. The loan program is available to cities, community groups, non-profit organizations, businesses and others who wish to collect and properly recycle beverage containers and organic materi-als generated at events held in Hennepin County.

G. Household Hazardous Waste and Problem Materials

The county operates two permanent drop-off facilities: the Hennepin County Recycling Center and Transfer Station and the South Hennepin Recycling and Problem Waste Drop-Off Center. Residents can use these facilities to drop off HHW and problem materials. In addition, the county co-sponsors collection events at various locations each year in partnership with host cities. Separate from these events, the county has also provided residents the opportunity to properly and safely dispose of their unwanted, unused and expired medicines at several collection events. Medicine collection events have been sponsored by the Hennepin

County Sheriff’s Office, Hennepin County Environmental Services Department, North Memorial Partnership for Change and the participating cities.

The county continues to promote toxicity reduction, separation of materials from the trash and proper disposal of HHW through a variety of methods including direct mail, Green Notes newsletter articles, communication releases, social media and presentations. The number of people participating at events and visiting drop-off facili-ties to dispose of HHW and problem materials increased 3.6 percent from 120,304 in 2009 to 124,463 in 2010. Many of the materials managed by these programs are banned from municipal solid waste. Although there are various private options for disposing of these wastes, the drop-off facilities provide a convenient one-stop location. These facilities accept a wide range of materials including electronics, paint, appliances, vehicle wastes (oil, batter-ies and tires), household batterbatter-ies, fluorescent lamps and products that contain ignitable, reactive, corrosive or toxic chemicals. All items except appliances and tires are ac-cepted without a fee.

In addition to accepting a wide range of materials, the facilities have convenient hours. The county also partici-pates in reciprocal use agreements with other metropoli-tan counties to allow their residents to deliver HHW and problem materials to the county’s permanent facilities and event collection sites. This agreement also allows Hennepin County residents to deliver HHW and problem materials to other participating metro area counties. The county of origin reimburses the receiving county for the cost of managing the waste. Since 2004, the county has been working in partnership with the City of Minneapolis to find a location for an additional drop-off facility.

20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 HHW/PM Program Participation

Number of vehicles using the facilities and events

(13)

Hours of Operation at the Facilities

Hennepin County has supported product stewardship ini-tiatives for electronics, mercury thermostats, rechargeable batteries, lead-acid batteries, motor oil, tires and fluorescent lamps. Product stewardship means that all parties involved in designing, manufacturing, selling and using a product take responsibility for environmental impacts at every stage of that product’s life. Greater private sector involvement and reduced dependence on government funding and programs are needed to achieve this outcome.

H. MSW Collection and Solid Waste Facilities

The county licenses all garbage haulers in the county under Ordinance 17 and as part of the metropolitan area regional licensing program. Recycling haulers are not licensed. Under Ordinance 17, the conditions of the operating license include basics such as vehicle decals, written reports on operations upon request, language re-garding cleanup charges and the right to examine hauler records. Licensing does not currently require performance

standards or reporting on waste quantities. Some mu-nicipalities in the county also license haulers. Fifteen of the county’s 44 cities have organized collection. Only two cities use city employees for collection. The rest contract out for service. Commercial garbage collection is a com-pletely open system.

Under the authority of Ordinance 2, Hennepin County licenses solid waste facilities. The purpose is to establish standards for disposal of solid waste within the county. Recycling facilities are not included. A map of these facilities is provided in Appendix E.

I. Resource Recovery

The county uses its trans-fer station in Brooklyn Park to facilitate the de-livery of MSW to resource recovery facilities. The county negotiates waste delivery agreements with haulers to deliver MSW to the Brooklyn Park Transfer Station or

directly to the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center (HERC). The fees are included in Appendix F. HERC is a mass burn waste-to-energy facility owned by the county and oper-ated by Covanta Energy. The facility produces enough electricity to power 25,000 homes each year, provides steam to downtown Minneapolis’ district heating and cooling system, and reduces the amount of waste going to landfills. HERC is currently permitted to burn 365,000 tons per year. (see chart next page).

For 20 years the county had a contract with Resource Recovery Technologies (RRT) to process up to 235,000 tons of waste annually for Refused Derived Fuel (RDF) at the Elk River Resource Recover Facility (ERRRF). The contract with RRT terminated in August of 2009, at which point the county stopped delivering waste. Ownership of the facility has changed and arrangements were made with Great River Energy (GRE) to resume deliveries in 2011 to the renamed Elk River Resource Processing Plant (ERRPP).

54% 17% 13% 8% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 8%

Materials Managed: Percent by weight in 2010

Electronics Paint Appliances

Motor Oil, Batteries, Tires

Flammables, Aerosols, Pesticides Household Batteries Miscellaneous Chemistries Other Fluorescent Lamps Day Hours Monday Closed

Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday 10 a.m. – 6 p.m. Wednesday 10 a.m. – 8 p.m. Saturday 8 a.m. – 5 p.m.

Sunday Closed

Holidays Closed most major holidays

(14)

J. Landfilling

There are no landfills operating in Hennepin County. MSW generated in Hennepin County is delivered to either local or out-of-state landfills. In 2010, about 99 percent of un-processed MSW was delivered to landfills in Minnesota.

Unprocessed MSW Deliveries to Landfills in 2011

Non-processible items and excess waste (waste received that is over the daily processing capacity) from Henne-pin facilities are delivered to nearby landfills. The county also landfills the ash that remains after processing waste at waste-to-energy facilities. Ash from HERC is delivered to the SKB landfill in Rosemount and the Allied Waste landfill in Sarona, Wisconsin. Residues, the fraction of non-combustible waste resulting from the creation of refuse-derived fuel, are also land disposed.

K. Other Wastes

Traditionally, the emphasis in county solid waste man-agement master plans has been on municipal solid waste. The regulation of commercial hazardous waste generation also plays a role in achieving the goals and policies of the Policy Plan. Hennepin County regulates businesses that generate hazardous waste to ensure that their wastes are being properly managed. Various pro-grams are in place to ensure businesses properly manage their hazardous wastes, including licensing and site inspections, enforcement actions, and training and outreach. Waste minimization and toxicity reduction are also encouraged. By minimizing their hazardous wastes, generators can ease their regulatory burden, reduce hazardous waste disposal costs and improve their image related to pollution prevention and environmental initiatives.

Non-MSW wastes include industrial, construction, pathological and infectious wastes. These materials are managed almost exclusively by the private sector. However, the county has made progress in using recy-cled tear-off shingles for road construction projects. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has issued specifications that allow for the use of up to five percent manufacturers’ shingle scrap in hot-mix asphalt. Because of the high demand for feedstocks, shingles are used regularly in road construction projects. As for other non-MSW, the county has an Industrial Waste Manage-ment Plan that addresses the manageManage-ment of these materials if they are received at the county’s solid waste facilities.

Resource Recovery

Tons of MSW processed at HERC and ERRRF

0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 HERC ERRRF

From Private System

Landfill Tons Location Owner Pine Bend 123,880 Inver Grove Heights, MN Allied Waste Elk River 73,990 Elk River, MN Waste Management Burnsville 60,968 Burnsville, MN Waste Management Spruce Ridge 46,901 Glencoe, MN Waste Management Superior 7-mile 3,685 Eau Claire, WI Veolia

Subtotal 309,424

From Hennepin Facilities

Landfill Tons Location Owner

Elk River 32,096 Elk River, MN Waste Management Pine Bend 7,305 Inver Grove Heights, MN Allied Waste

(15)

IV. Trends

Waste generation decreased following the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent economic stagnation. Despite this short-term reduction in waste generation, MSW genera-tion in Hennepin County is projected to grow 25 percent by 2030 (using 2010 as a baseline). Most of this increase will be attributable to population growth, but demo-graphic changes will also affect waste generation. As baby boomers retire, their consumption expenditures are projected to decrease, which will result in the generation of less waste. Young families will continue to generate the most waste, though it is hoped that kids will continue to show an interest in greening their schools and homes. The county will need to develop messages for all age groups. Consumer preferences with respect to digital media will continue to have an impact on recycling. Newspapers have become physically smaller, and subscriptions have dropped dramatically as content has migrated online. As a result, tonnage of newspapers picked up curbside has dropped dramatically. This trend will continue. A Morgan Stanley inquiry discovered that 42 percent of U.S. tablet owners will cancel their print newspaper

subscription. According to a study from forest products industry information provider RISI, paper end uses (including magazine, book and newspaper) will drop 12-21 percent by 2015 from 2010 numbers. Over the next 15 years, paper usage will decrease more rapidly, with numbers dropping another 40-50 percent.

Innovations in packaging materials will also have an impact on recycling. Many businesses have introduced sustainable packaging initiatives. Industry has responded by using lighter materials, reducing the amount of packaging and the cost of transportation. This applies to plastic, paper and even glass – new wine bottle designs are up to 27 percent lighter than conventional wine bottles.

The county is creating strategies now to meet goals established for 2015 through 2030. The past several years have demonstrated how rapidly products and markets change. The county will continue to monitor trends as they relate to recycling. The information gathered can be applied to the implementation of recycling strategies as the county adapts to changing circumstances.

Residential Recycling

Hennepin County 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Ton s Re cyc le d Newspaper Mixed/Other Paper Metal Cans/Scrap Glass Plastic Bottles
(16)

V. Strategies

A. Introduction

The county has implemented many successful waste management programs in an effort to meet state goals. Details about these programs were provided in the description of the existing solid waste management system. The county will main-tain its support for effective existing programs. However, the new Policy Plan goals will require more than business as usual. The state goal of 45 percent recycling by 2015 is significantly higher than the county’s current rate of 38 percent. In addition, the county has chosen to set a goal of 6 percent for organics recycling by 2015, double the minimum state goal of 3 percent. Given the gap between current performance and future goals, the county will need to implement new programs and significantly expand existing programs. Critical elements contained in various strategies throughout include the following:

• Performance measurement is difficult, but it is critical to demonstrating achieve-ment of strategies and desired outcomes – this will require actions by the county as well as the region and the MPCA.

• Commercial recycling and organics present the best opportunities to significant-ly increase waste abatement levels.

• Ability to meet plan objectives will be determined by choices and behaviors residents and businesses make, hence the importance of education, proactive assistance and appropriate incentives.

• Standardization of collection methods, materials collected and education should increase levels of residential curbside recycling.

• Expanded program efforts will focus on apartment recycling and recycling at events and other away-from-home venues.

• Despite these efforts, a significant volume of recyclables will still be discarded in MSW bound for landfills and will require separation either at transfer stations or landfills prior to disposal of the waste.

Because of the importance of moving beyond the status quo, the strategies will focus on what the county is doing differently than in the past. There are strategies for each waste management method and other supporting sections. Each section begins by establishing overall targets and listing county actions. A table indicates whether the county program is a continuation of past efforts, a significant expansion or a newly created strategy. The maintenance and incremental improvement of existing programs will contribute to progress toward state goals; however, programs that are simply a continuation of past efforts will not be described in the strategies. Please refer back to the description of the existing system for more detail.

(17)

B. Education and Outreach

The ability of the county to reach the solid waste management goals outlined in this plan will be determined by the everyday choices and behaviors of the county’s 1.2 million residents and thousands of businesses. When people choose to use less, recycle more and properly dispose of waste, their actions will be reflected in the county’s waste management data and results.

Each major waste management strategy will have a new or expanded education and outreach component. Details on some strategies have been provided in the master plan but others will be developed in the future. In general, the county’s education and outreach strategies will include the elements listed below.

General Strategies

1. Develop high quality messages and materials

The county will engage and collaborate with the community to gather informa-tion on current behaviors, identify barriers to acinforma-tion and improve feedback to develop messages that are effective. The county will use innovative, evidenced-based education strategies that have been proven effective to motivate behavior change and share these materials with our partners to expand the reach and consistency of the message. The county will also expand its resources to provide information in languages other than English and in multimedia formats, including videos and interactive websites.

2. Deliver messages using mass communication channels

The county will use mass communication channels, including advertising, media coverage, direct mail, print materials, websites and social media, to build aware-ness of how to reduce waste, recycle more and properly dispose of waste.

3. Deliver messages using direct outreach methods

The county will use direct outreach methods, including technical assistance, presentations, events, tours and multicultural outreach to communicate with individuals on a one-on-one level to address their unique situations and challenges.

4. Facilitate peer-to-peer education

The most effective messages are delivered by a trusted member of one’s commu-nity. To facilitate peer-to-peer education, the county will partner with community groups, congregations, youth-serving organizations and others to deliver environ-mental education programs. The county will offer educational resources, training and grants to communities. The county will also expand its volunteer program, including the Master Recycler/Composter program, to extend the reach of our educational efforts.

Implementation – Implementation of these strategies will be ongoing. The county will measure outputs such as number of campaigns produced, number of materials shared with partners and number of events attended. The county will also track the number of people reached through these education and outreach efforts. Ultimately, these strategies will help the county reach its goals for source reduction, recycling and organics recovery.

(18)

Target

The county will rely on the MPCA to develop a quantitative model and measure the primary source reduction outcome of a 1 percent to 2 percent reduction in waste gener-ated. The county will measure program outputs such as the number of partnerships developed, people reached with educational campaigns and businesses receiving technical assistance.

2010 Actual: unknown 2015 Objective: 1-2 percent

C. Source Reduction and Reuse

New and Expanded Strategies

1. Research the existing source reduction and reuse system to address

barriers and services gaps

Garbage and recycling are huge industries dominated by a short list of compa-nies. It is an understatement to say that source reduction and reuse are not nearly as well developed. There are many different participants in a highly fragmented marketplace. Research in this area will help the county gain a better understanding of the existing system, identify barriers to development and formulate strategies that will address service gaps and overcome the difficulties associated with source reduction and reuse.

First, the county will research the existing source reduction and reuse system. In some ways, this is an infrastructure assessment. One way to identify opportunities for improvement is to focus on infrastructure and draft a plan revolving around those facilities. Pioneers of zero waste practices say six facilities are needed to reach 90 percent recovery. This list includes MRFs and compost facilities, but it also includes reuse and repair facilities. When it comes to reuse, the term facility could apply to a small business or non-profit. The point is the county needs to have a complete picture of the reuse environment in order to support it.

Second, the county will identify the barriers facing those who are involved in source reduction and reuse. For example, a reuse non-profit may be burdened by an excess of unwanted and unusable items. Donations often include items such as paint, HHW and broken items. The reuse organization incurs the high cost of disposal.

Program/Activity Continue Expand New

Research existing source reduction and reuse options to address barriers

and service gaps

3

Partner with retailers, non-profits,

and schools

3

Reinvigorate the Business Waste

Reduction Program

3

Environmentally Preferable

Purchasing

3

Educational Campaign

3

Choose to Reuse

3

(19)

Third, the county will identify service gaps and propose improvements. The county will assess whether there is a need to expand its reuse network to include busi-nesses such as auction houses, estate sales, salvage busibusi-nesses and reuse/overstock stores. The county will address the fact that many reuse businesses do not take bulky items. Reuse opportunities are difficult to find and these items often end up in a landfill. The county will also work to find a financially viable replacement for the Green Institute’s Reuse Center and its deconstruction services.

Finally, the county will evaluate the potential use of incentives. These could include grants for waste reduction actions by businesses to streamline operations, grants for waste reduction actions above and beyond waste prevention week education, and monetary assistance to non-profits involved in reuse and waste prevention.

Implementation – The county will develop a proposal for the scope of the research in the second half of 2012. Research will be performed in 2013. Recom-mendations will be evaluated and implemented in 2014. The deliverable will be a research paper. Specific measurements will be developed later to track the performance of strategies that are implemented.

2. Partner with retailers, non-profits, schools and others

The county will work to expand donation opportunities for unused products from businesses to non-profits. This includes assisting non-profits that funnel unused products to schools, teachers and the disadvantaged. The county will work with schools to provide more reuse opportunities for school events, classroom supplies, daily operations and facility rentals. Waste prevention will be addressed, including food waste prevention in the school cafeterias. The county will also provide Hennepin County Libraries and school libraries with educational resources on waste reduction and reuse. Finally, the county will reach out to emergency preparedness planners to have them include in their plans resources on reuse and deconstruction during cleanup after damage from a disaster. The county will provide resources and connections to cities, contractors and deconstruction services to get salvageable items removed.

Implementation – This strategy will begin immediately. The county will create a list of partners as an output metric. The county will work actively with its partners to determine the best way to measure results.

3. Reinvigorate the Business Waste Reduction Program

The county values the opportunity to work with businesses on reducing the volume of discards coming out of buildings and offices. Work will be done to provide resources and direction to businesses to develop internal and external reuse protocols for machinery, office supplies, furniture, fleet and the like. The county will provide resources to link businesses to reuse businesses and promote “Adaptive Reuse” – altering a building for a new purpose instead of demolition and new construction.

Implementation – Implementation will begin in the first half of 2013. Measure-ment will include the number of businesses the county reaches and a count of the materials that are distributed.

(20)

4. Review county’s results in procuring environmentally preferable

products as directed by County Board Resolution 01-4-263, and

recommend changes and updates to procedures as necessary to

increase procurement of environmentally preferable products

As a large purchaser and waste generator, the county has a responsibility to lead by example as directed by County Board Resolution 01-4-263, in 2001 the county established an in-house environmentally preferable purchasing program (EPP). The review of the EPP program will assess current procurement practices, provide baseline information and identify products to eliminate or substitute.

Specific recommendations will be made at a later date, but there are several actions that will likely facilitate improvements to the program. An EPP team would coordinate efforts across the different areas involved in the purchasing process, from the buyers and product users to the vendors and advocates in environmental services. Successful implementation will require broad support and feedback from all levels. Guidelines and training will help ensure the applica-tion of environmental criteria. The county should revisit specific goals and set environmental standards without sacrificing performance and costs. Finally, the county should consider the possibility of integrating environmental consider-ations into purchasing documents.

Implementation – Staff will report to the County Board by March 31, 2012. Recommendations will be provided by the second half of 2012. The implementa-tion of recommendaimplementa-tions will occur in 2013. At the time of implementaimplementa-tion, metrics will be developed.

5. Implement an educational campaign focused on source reduction and

reuse

The Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board launched a new campaign in October 2011 that encourages residents to reduce waste by “getting less.” The campaign was well received. The county will extend the campaign into 2012 by purchasing additional commercial airtime. The county will also develop educa-tional campaigns on other waste reduction topics, for example junk mail reduction, greening celebrations and reuse of household and bulky items.

Implementation – The county will extend the SWMCB campaign during the first half of 2012 and develop additional campaigns from 2013 to 2015. Output metrics will include the amount of airtime and an estimate of the size of the audience reached. Other education campaigns will be measured by tracking the number of materials distributed.

(21)

Recovery Target

Recycling strategies are divided into several different sections. The first section, addressed imme-diately below, pertains to general recycling strate-gies that have broad application across the different areas. The other sections include residen-tial curbside, commercial and multi-family recycling.

2010 Actual: 514,199 tons recovered (38 percent recycling rate)

2015 Objective: 639,000 tons recovered (45 percent recycling rate)

D. Recycling

Expanded Strategies

1. Recover plastic and metal from the waste stream at county facilities

The county owns and operates the Brooklyn Park Transfer Station. This presents an opportunity to recover materials from the waste stream. The county has negotiated a contract with Rational Energies to lease space at the transfer station and set up a sorting line to recover plastic and metal from the incoming waste. About one third of the estimated 22,000 tons recovered from the waste stream will be recycled. Two thirds will be converted into synthetic crude oil. The county will evaluate the option of replicating this initiative at HERC.

Implementation – The Rational Energies sort line is tentatively scheduled to be operational by May of 2012. The county will track the tons recovered.

2. Expand the Master Recycler/Composter Program

The county offered the Master Recycler/Composter Program for the first time in the spring of 2011. Master Recyclers receive an eight-week training on waste reduction, recycling and composting in exchange for thirty hours of volunteer payback. Volunteer activities include staffing booths at events, creating educa-tional resources and displays, and designing and implementing waste reduction plans for special events, schools and the workplace. Once the thirty hour commitment is fulfilled, participants are certified Master Recycler/Composters and encouraged to continue volunteer service. The county will offer two courses each year, training up to thirty participants per course.

Implementation – This strategy will be ongoing. The county will measure the number of participants and keep a record of the volunteer services performed.

Program/Activity Continue Expand New

Recycling at county facilities

3

Master Recycling/Composter

Program

3

Ordinance 15 – Solid Waste

Management Fee

3

County drop-off facilities

3

Waste Abatement Incentive

Fund grants

3

(22)

Target

Residential curbside recycling accounts for 20 percent of the total tons recycled in the county. Studies show there is an opportunity to recover more recyclables from the waste stream and contrib-ute to the overall 45 percent recycling goal established by the policy plan. Because residential curbside recycling pro-grams are administered by cities, the focus will be on implementation at the municipal level. 2010 Actual: 92,583 tons recovered 2015 Objective: 125,000 tons recovered

E. Residential Curbside Recycling

New Strategies

1. Implement the Residential Recycling Funding Policy

The county will use SCORE funding as an incentive to improve recycling. The residential recycling funding policy was recently revised to require more materials to be collected, require a single or dual sort collection method and set expecta-tions for education and outreach efforts. Cities must meet one of three perfor-mance standards established in the funding policy: an average of 725 pounds of recycling per household per year, a 35 percent recycling rate or an 80 percent recovery rate. The county will continue the current distribution of all SCORE funds received from the state to all cities within Hennepin County for their recycling programs. However, if the cities do not meet the performance standard, an improvement plan must be negotiated with the county. The funding policy is attached in Appendix G.

Implementation – A transition to the new standards will occur in 2012. Perfor-mance will be evaluated on an annual basis and the county will work closely with cities to develop recycling programs. Haulers report to cities per contract require-ments. Each city must report contract, program, tonnage and financial information to the county.

2. Expand education and technical assistance

As a part of the revised funding policy, the county will play a larger role in educa-tion and outreach. The county will form a communicaeduca-tions committee to organize efforts, provide promotional resources to partners, create a priority message campaign on an annual basis and distribute a template to encourage consistent messaging. Cities will be required to use county images and terminology for recycling guidelines. Cities will mail a recycling guide to residents once each year and complete two other outreach activities from a menu of options.

The county will also provide technical assistance to cities. This will include assis-tance with RFPs, model contract language, support with implementation of new activities, information sharing, research and assistance with enforcement.

Implementation – Standard terminology and recycling guidelines will be devel-oped in 2012. The county will also develop an annual priority message campaign beginning in 2012. Performance measurements will include the number of direct mail pieces, number of people reached through other media, number of materials shared with partners and general feedback on the visibility of the campaigns.

Program/Activity Continue Expand New

Residential Recycling Funding Policy

3

Education and technical assistance

3

(23)

3. Update Ordinance 13 on municipal recycling to update minimum

requirements

Ordinance 13 was passed in 1986 to establish a recycling goal of 16 percent. This goal has been far surpassed and the ordinance is out of date. The county will revise Ordinance 13 to reflect changes to the funding policy and support the new policy plan goals. Minimum standards such as materials to be collected will be incorporated into the ordinance. These standards will apply to all cities, even those that opt out of the funding agreement or those with an open recycling collection system that do not rely on the county’s funding.

Implementation – This ordinance will be reviewed in the second half of 2012. If other ordinances are involved in a wholesale reevaluation of solid waste ordi-nances, the review process may extend into 2013. After the review process, recommendations will be provided. The county will develop performance measures after changes to the ordinance are adopted.

(24)

Target

The commercial sector generates over half of the total waste in the county and accounts for 77 percent of the total tons recycled. Any significant improvement in the recycling rate will need to include progress in the commercial sector. Hennepin County will work with the SWMCB to explore the expansion of regional hauler licensing to include non-MSW, recycling and organics haulers. This includes efforts to work collabora-tively with them PCA to develop a standard commercial recycling data collection program. 2010 Actual: 387,000 tons recovered 2015 Objective: 450,000 tons recovered

F. Commercial Recycling

New Strategies

1. Investigate opportunities and secure partnerships with Waste Wise and

other businesses organizations to inform, support and promote

busi-ness recycling

Previous county efforts to develop a commercial sector recycling campaign have not been sustained. To revive county efforts, various private sector stakeholders such as Minnesota Waste Wise (a member-supported nonprofit that provides sustainability consulting to businesses and organizations), local chambers of commerce, BOMA (Building Owners and Managers Association) and hospitality associations will be included in the design and development of a new, ongoing program. Once developed, the county will explore partnering with private sector organizations, such as Waste Wise, to implement the program. This approach places emphasis on a business-to-business peer relationship.

Implementation – A partnership will be developed in the second half of 2012 and the roll out of a joint recycling campaign will begin in 2013. The county will track the number of businesses reached and the number of businesses who seek additional assistance.

2. Design a comprehensive business assistance program that encourages

businesses to take advantage of the environmental, social and

eco-nomic benefits of recycling in the workplace

In addition to partnering with various organizations, the county will expand outreach efforts by working directly with businesses. Efforts will be focused on large individual generators and commercial areas that generate large amounts of recyclables. Assis-tance will center on a short list of best management practices. The county will explore the possibility of developing a set of minimum standards for a Green Business Certification component of the commercial recycling program.

Program/Activity Continue Expand New

Partnership with Waste Wise and

other business organizations

3

Business assistance program

3

Evaluation of financial incentives to

encourage recycling

3

Evaluation of low-cost service options

for small/medium businesses

3

(25)

The county will encourage co-branding of the business assistance program and materials in each community, emphasizing the importance of presenting a unified program county-wide. If cities have the resources and ability to administer aspects of the program locally, the county will encourage them to do so and allow them the flexibility to address local conditions and tailor outreach to the needs of their respective business communities.

Implementation – The county will design an assistance program in conjunction with partners during the second half 2012, identify initial targets and begin assistance during the first half of 2013, and select additional targets for assistance annually thereafter. The county will track the number of businesses that are targeted and the success of providing assistance.

3. Evaluate financial incentives to encourage recycling

Stakeholder feedback has indicated that many businesses prefer incentives over mandates. The county will evaluate possible incentives for the commercial sector such as providing containers, mini-grants and low-interest loans, as well as changes to garbage and recycling service pricing structures.

Implementation – This will begin in 2013 and the deliverable will be a report analyzing the options. Recommendations will be brought forward and imple-mentation will begin after strategies are adopted. Performance measures will be developed to track the success of the strategies.

4. Evaluate low-cost service options for small and medium businesses

The cost of recycling services can be a barrier for small businesses wishing to participate in recycling. To reduce this barrier, the county will evaluate low-cost service options such as including small and neighborhood businesses in residen-tial recycling programs, expanding the use of city and county drop-off recycling centers and instituting cooperative collection programs.

Implementation – This will begin in 2013 and the deliverable will be a report analyzing the options. Recommendations will be brought forward and imple-mentation will begin after strategies are adopted. Performance measures will be developed to track the success of the strategies.

(26)

Target

Multifamily recycling is usually collected with commercial recycling. Since it is lumped in with businesses, it is difficult to measure. It is important to address multifamily recycling separately: It is not commercial, and while it is residential housing, multi-family households have different characteris-tics than single-family households with curbside collection. The county will develop a customized approach for multifamily recycling focused on Bloomington, Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, Crystal, Edina, Minneapo-lis, New Hope, Plymouth, Richfield and St. Louis Park, where most multifamily housing in the county is located. 2010 Actual: unknown 2015 Objective: 19,000 tons recovered

G. Multifamily Recycling

Strategies

1. Create new educational materials and provide technical assistance

The county will create new educational materials and provide technical assis-tance to building owners, building managers and residents. New resources will include best management practices for multi-unit buildings and townhome developments of varying sizes, ready-to-print signs, labels and resident educa-tional materials (in multiple languages), a resident pledge, program tips and troubleshooting, case studies, and links to additional local and regional resources. To develop a targeted multi-family recycling campaign, the county will include cities and key multi-unit building and townhome development stakeholders – such as the Minnesota Multi Housing Association (MHA), local property man-agement associations, condo and townhome associations, tenant groups, public housing authorities and large property management companies – in the design and development of the program. Tools will include informational resources, onsite assistance, waste audits, phone and email assistance, and general market-ing. The county will work with cities to develop a unified program county-wide that can be co-branded in each community. The county will recruit haulers to champion the program and assist in recruitment by marketing the program through their existing outreach channels.

Implementation – This strategy will begin immediately and be ongoing. The county will measure the number of buildings visited and work with cities to develop other performance measures.

Program/Activity Continue Expand New

Education and technical assistance

3

Evaluation of incentives

3

(27)

2. Evaluate incentives

In addition to educational materials and technical assistance, incentives can also be used to improve recycling performance. The county will evaluate the following incentives for multifamily recycling by consulting with building owners, managers and residents.

• Free containers

• Recycling infrastructure grants • Bulky waste pick-up (large items)

• Recycle Bank – earn points and get rewards for recycling • Reverse vending machines that accept recyclables

Implementation – This will begin in 2013 and the deliverable will be a report analyzing the options. Recommendations will be brought forward and imple-mentation will begin after strategies are adopted. Performance measures will be developed to track the success of the strategies.

3. Evaluate low-cost service options

As with small businesses, the cost of recycling can be a barrier to participation. The county will evaluate municipal collection contracts and drop-off collection points as potential low-cost service options for multifamily recycling.

Implementation – This will begin in 2013 and the deliverable will be a report analyzing the options. Recommendations will be brought forward and imple-mentation will begin after strategies are adopted. Performance measures will be developed to track the success of the strategies.

(28)

Target

Several studies show that organics comprise almost 30 percent of the waste being discarded by busi-nesses and residents. This represents a significant opportunity to reduce the amount of waste going to landfills by recovering organics. 2010 Actual: 49,972 tons recovered (3.7 percent) • Commercial = 49,369 tons • Residential = 603 tons 2015 Objective: 85,000 tons recovered (6 percent) • Commercial = 77,000 tons

• Residential = 8,000 tons

H. Organics Recovery

New and Expanded Strategies

1. Target large businesses and commercial areas that produce large

quan-tities of organic waste

The county has worked extensively with schools and cities to recover organics. There is a significant opportunity to replicate this success in the commercial sector. Going forward, the county will expand education and technical assistance to businesses. The creation of a targeted organics campaign in the commercial sector will focus on grocery stores, full service restaurants, event centers, hotels and workplace cafeterias. Efforts will focus on large generators of organics and commercial no

References

Related documents

Each solid waste and recycling plan shall include an estimate of the amount of capacity required, the location and placements of the containers, and a summary of the waste

For a comparison of the cases with different capacity, the cost rate associated with the investment and the exergy destruction ( , + ) is related to the exergy of

For the 1999 estima- tion our results show that the probability of R&D investment at a firm level increased with size, a market diversification measure, and exposure to

 All artwork submitted becomes property of Fairfield County Recycling & SCDHEC of Solid Waste Reduction and Recycling and may be reproduced!. Fairfield

The Clinton County Department of Waste Management (DWM) administers the recycling service contract on behalf of community partners.. The service provider is Granger Recycling

• If your waste disposal contract will expire soon, contact solid waste haulersand recycling vendors (see Mecklenburg County Waste Reduction

ReSound LiNX TM is made to connect directly to your iPhone ® , iPad ® and iPod touch ® .* So you can explore the endless possibilities of streaming telephone conversations,

If more invoice financing was available, it would enable SMEs within the supply chain to expand their business activities through the ready availability of credit for working capital