Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWork Session- Plastic Film Recycling1 Carly Persson and Cassandra Fowler Jim Feldman –Environmental Studies 490 Plastic Bag Reduction Written Project May 10, 2016 Executive Summary While it is mentioned in City of Oshkosh Sustainability Plan that the city wishes to “Encourage use of cloth or reusable shopping bags. Educate retailers and shoppers about advantages of reusable bags, and promote reusable bag programs. Consider an ordinance that bans free plastic bags and foam containers,” no such programs or bans have been pursued by the city (City of Oshkosh, 2012). Assembly Bill 730, passed by Wisconsin’s Senate and House of Representatives, now prevents political subdivisions (cities, towns, villages, and counties) from regulating plastic and other “single-use” containers. We were initially planning to pursue a plastic bag reduction program similar to the one the city of Eau Claire drafted in 2013 but it is no longer possible. We are proposing a change in operation at the Tri-County Recycling Facility to initiate mandatory plastic film recycling and begin offering curbside recycling of plastic film to residents. Plastic film, for our purposes, is defined as plastic-based materials such as retail bags, produce bags, newspaper bags, produce bags, case wrap, pallet wrap, etc. We are proposing a plastic bag and film curbside recycling ordinance modeled after the city of Madison’s to reduce the amount of plastic bags and film entering landfills, waterways, properties, parks, etc. and stop Oshkosh from being a contributor to the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. If our proposal was enacted residents would be required to place their plastic film inside a plastic bag and place in their curbside single-stream recycling bins. 2 Background and Context/ Significance for Sustainability Currently, plastic film recycling in Oshkosh is not mandatory, meaning it is allowed to be disposed of in the landfill without penalty. While several Oshkosh businesses take part in the Wrap Recycling Action Program (W.R.A.P.), which allows retailers like Festival Foods, Menards,Lowe’s, Wal-Mart, Target, Pick N’ Save, etc. sell their collected plastic film to companies like TREX to be repurposed into pellets, decking, benches, etc., only an estimated 0.6% of plastic film has been diverted from landfills. This is due to a lack of consumer awareness and participation, and a failed education campaign which we hope to remedy. The average American family takes home an estimated 1,500 bags every year with only 0.6% being recycled (O’Brine). In the City of Oshkosh that is an estimated 32,250,000 plastic bags being used every year. This means that an average 32,056,500 bags are being put in the Winnebago County Landfill which equals about 194 tons annually. This accounts for 28% of the plastic waste that is entering into the county landfill that could be recycled into new products and doesn’t bring into account the amount of plastic that is disposed of illegally. The issue with plastic film is not only the space it takes up, but the environmental impacts of their degradation once in the landfill or disposed of in waterway systems. Environmental Considerations Plastic bags enter the waterway system through illegal dumping, land runoff,windblown, wastewater systems, or from being left on recreational beaches. Once plastics are in the environment they break down via photo degradation from sunlight, temperature, physical wave action, and biodegradation of organisms (Andrady). When plastics degrade they become brittle and break down into smaller and smaller pieces, known as micro plastics that can be mistaken for food. As polyethylene plastic rests in water it absorbs Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) 3 that naturally occur within the water system. POPs are not normally bioavailable to organisms (Andrady), but through ingestion of micro plastics the POPs have a route into an organism's digestive tract. These pollutants then have the ability to move up the food chain as lower organisms are ingested. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) which are already a great concern in Winnebago county are one type of POP that can be absorbed by plastics and move up into the food chain (Derraik), endangering those who rely on the fishery here as a food source.Micro plastics have been found in brown shrimp (Devriese et al) and fish stomachs (Boerger et al). Many types of POPs such as PCBs are known endocrine disrupters that can lead to reproductive issues, thyroid and hormonal disruptions, metabolic issues, and even cancer (Tabb and Blamberg). As plastic debris accumulate in our waterways our risk of exposure to these POPs increases. When plastics enter the waterways it not only endangers our local systems, but adds to the global systems as well. Pre and post breakdown plastic debris eventually makes its way through freshwater systems into the marine environment. Due to wave and gyre action there have been large accumulations of garbage, mostly consisting of plastic known as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. The exact size of the Patch is unknown as it is estimated that 50% of plastic sinks and accumulates in the soil,but is estimated to be about the size of Texas. However, there are multiple patches at the various gyres throughout both the North and South Pacific ("Great Pacific Garbage Patch" 1). Plastic debris are known to affect 86% of sea turtle species, 44% of seabirds, and 43% of marine mammals. Plastic that is mistaken as food either poisons or causes the organisms to starve to death after not being able to digest the inorganic polyethylene plastic material (Derraik). Some studies comparing micro plastics to algae found that there were five times the amount of algae to plastic but the weight of plastic was six times that of algae (Moore 4 et al). As plastics break down they sink due to the high density, settle and accumulate on the bottom of aquatic environments. This can lead to oxygen depletion in the lower regions of the water column having detrimental effects on the habitat. Economic Considerations Oshkosh is known as Wisconsin’s “Event City” on the water. As such many of these events center on the use of Lake Winnebago and the Fox River. The recreational fishing industry on Lake Winnebago alone brings in about 234 million dollars annually (Cook 1). As a large contributor to the local economy it is no surprise that the Economic Development Plan calls for local and regional marketing of the city’s resources along with emphasis on improving the downtown and riverfront area. “Foster economic revitalization of Downtown and the Riverfront by encouraging diverse economic activity, including but not limited to, private and public offices, retail, services, hospitality businesses, high density housing, and civic, cultural and entertainment uses.” (Neiforth 81). Clean waterways are essential in order to reach these goals, not only for the health concern but the economic implications of a safe and clean water shed. Property value along the the riverfront will increase leading to greater influx of local tax revenue. By making curbside recycling of plastic film available to residents of Oshkosh over 192 tons of plastic and the dangerous by- products of plastic degradation could be prevented from entering the Oshkosh waterways and eventually accumulating in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and our food system. Since Winnebago’s recycling facility is shared with Brown and Outagamie County there is a chance to make a significant change to the Fox Valley and Fox watershed. If the recycling facility alters operation to begin accepting plastic the other two counties will be better equipped to begin their own curbside plastic film recycling program available to residents. With the current pricing of plastic as listed in Figure 1 the plastic film entering the Winnebago County 5 Landfill each year equals over $27,160 dollars. This number is for 7 cents a pound, but could get as high as $38,800 if prices go back up to 10 cents a pound. Social Considerations Without the possibility of residential curbside plastic film recycling, people will continue on in their ways. 192 tons of landfill space per year will continue to be filled by plastic film, and Oshkosh’s current landfill may need to be closed prematurely which is sure to pose an unnecessary economic burden. Understanding behavioral change and public perceptions of plastic bag recycling is the most essential factor for tailoring our program to best suit the public’s needs. While it is possible to implement a curbside plastic bag recycling ordinance without considering public behavior, motivations, and perceptions, the program will be unsuccessful without the cooperation of Oshkosh’s citizens. For optimal response, residents must: be educated, believe recycling is easy and convenient, and have a mandatory curbside recycling program in their neighborhood. 6 According to many waste management behavior studies, educational initiatives must go along with new recycling systems in order for high participation rates to result. An article by Christine Thomas argues that high quality public participation is essential for successful recycling rates. To evaluate her theory, Thomas used an assumed participation rate of 65% based on the number of properties that have requested recycling boxes (2001). She surveyed these participants to learn which percentage recognized which materials do and do not belong in curbside recycling bins. The results from the study found that diversion rates are best achieved when there is a good level of understanding from participants about what they are being asked to do (2001). Also, according to McDonald and Ball’s article in Resources, Conservation, and Recycling, the public plays an instrumental role in determining where domestic waste will end up. This study surveyed 500 Glasgow, Scotland citizens served by two plastics collection services to understand the characteristics, behavior, motivation, and consumer views of those who recycle. McDonald and Ball found that those aged 60+ were most likely to participate in plastic recycling and those who recycle other materials are likely to recycle plastic as well (1998). They suggest that promotional material for the recycling of other materials is combined with plastic to implement a scheme that is economically viable (1998). Citizens studied throughout the literature tend to only recycle plastic film if they are under the assumption that it is easy and convenient. An article by Domina and Koch investigates how convenience influences recycling behaviors and frequency (2002). They collected and analyzed data from questionnaires distributed to 5,000 random U.S. households that asked for the type of recycling programs available and which materials they usually, sometimes, or never recycled. The results indicated that households were most willing to recycle a variety of products if the recycling program was convenient. The authors deduce that access and convenience are the 7 most instrumental in establishing a successful community recycling program, and that curbside programs are most effective (2002). The last method of achieving high recycling rates is by establishing mandatory curbside plastic film recycling programs in all neighborhoods. A study by Keramitsoglou and Tsagarakis concludes that a two-stage intervention approach that includes promotional and educational elements and enhanced curbside pickup efficiency is essential for maximizing public participation and acceptance (2013). They also determine that those lacking recycling experience prefer voluntary recycling systems over mandatory ones and that financial incentives may also enhance curbside pickup effectiveness. While voluntary recycling programs may be more desirable to the public, they will not result in the drastic change required for a significant reduction in plastic entering landfills and waterways in Wisconsin (2013). A mandatory plastic film recycling program would make it illegal for plastic film to be disposed of in the trash and landfills. If trash collectors were to see repeated instances of plastic film being disposed of in trash bins by residents, a warning tag would be attached to their bin. Repeated offenses would result in citations and fines. Recommendations We are recommending an ordinance (Appendix A) that requires all residents to add plastic bags and plastic film to their curbside bin. In order to accomplish this the Tri-County Recycling facility will need to work with the city of Oshkosh by lowering the speed of their conveyor belt. This would assist workers in removing the added volume of material needed to be removed at the first sorting area and avoid the film from getting snagged in the equipment. After collection, the plastic film would be sold to businesses within the W.R.A.P. program such as Trex to be recycled into usable materials. All plastic film will need to tied up in a single plastic 8 shopping bag about the size of a basketball. This allows for easy removal by works, avoiding snags in equipment, and from getting too dirty when dumped onto the receiving floor. An education would need to be launched to educate residents on proper disposal within their single stream bin. We suggest a strategy that would be marketable to many age brackets such as YouTube tutorials, newspaper articles, online, and mailed guidelines. Benchmarking We interviewed two secondary stakeholders from the University of Wisconsin –Eau Claire (UWEC) to further develop the plastic film reduction plan for the city of Oshkosh. We chose to interview David Soll and Crispin Pierce as they were instrumental in the formation of a Sustainable Bag Committee in Eau Claire and have helped implement a four phase reduction plan that would reduce paper and plastic bag use in their city by 80 percent. From 2013 to 2015 David Soll served as a Co-Chair of the Sustainable Bag Committee, and Crispin Pierce has since taken his position on the committee. It brought awareness to the strides they have made and roadblocks they have faced as a committee which will aid in making our ordinance most effective. We named David Soll a secondary stakeholder as he will be indirectly affected, neither positively or negatively, by the formation of a plastic bag reduction plan in Oshkosh. He spoke about the initial formation of the committee, which essentially came about when environmental activists like himself, concerned citizens, and several retailers came together to discuss their concerns and recommendations. The formation of Eau Claire’s committee suggests that it has many civically engaged citizens. David said the group met a lot initially until a goal was agreed upon: a recommendation for the city to reduce their plastic and paper bag use by 80 percent over the course of five years. A recommendation report was formally written and delivered to the city 9 which included four distinct phases: the pre-development phase, the education phase, the incentive phase, and the requirement phase. The pre-development phase would allow 12 months for the committee to complete remaining program details, the education phase would include an aggressive advertising campaign to reduce usage by 45 percent, the incentive phase would reduce disposable bag use by 65 percent and require retailers to offer 5 cents to customers who would bring their own bags, and the requirement phase would recommend imposing a 10 cent fee on bags distributed at point-of-sale. David said the committee faced a lot of challenges when it came to measuring reduction progress. He also emphasized that behavior change among individuals is very difficult and believes fees or bans are the only effective methods of reducing plastic bag use rather than half measures like educational or reusable bag campaigns. Since David was unaware of recent developments since leaving the committee, he gave us Crispin Pierce’s contact information. Crispin supplied us with the most current information on the progress of Eau Claire’s Sustainable Bag Commission. While the initial recommendation plan stated the city would have completed the proposed education phase by 2015, they are still in that stage as of March 2016. The committee and environmental studies students at UW Eau Claire are working on a reusable bag campaign that will educate the general public while simultaneously advertising local businesses. The committee hopes to distribute the reusable bags they design at community functions like parades, festivals, etc. The commission is also still utilizing environmental studies students every spring to count the bags used by customers at the ends of retail checkout lanes. The city of Madison is the only city in Wisconsin to have curbside plastic film recycling available to their residents. Their county’s material recycling facility, Pellitteri Waste Systems accommodated this by slowing down the first conveyor belt that brings material up to the first 10 pre-sort area. The 509,939 residents of Dane county are required to fill a regular plastic grocery bag with their other bags and plastic film to about the size of a basketball. This bag of bags is then tied shut and placed in the curbside receptacle container to make its way with the rest of the materials to the Pellitteri processing facility. By tying up the bags together in a single bag it allows them to travel up the conveyor belt without getting caught in the equipment and allows for easy removal at the pre-sort. This also keeps the film inside clean when the recyclables are dumped onto the receiving floor. Since, the bag of bags are added in with the rest of the single stream recyclables there are no additional routes for the sanitation crew. The three combined counties of Winnebago, outagamie, and Brown have a combined population of 604,472 with 250,849 households compared to the 216,022 households in Dane County. We therefore assume that the amount of recyclable material entering the Tri-County Recycling Facility would be similar in volume to the influx material at the Pellitteri facility. Costs and Barriers There are several costs and barriers that must be addressed in order for our ordinance to be effective. As far as costs, the additional labor required to keep up with the volume of materials once the conveyor belt is slowed at Tri-County Recycling must be considered. With additional labor and a slowing of the conveyor belt may come a lengthening in hours of operation at the facility which could also increase costs. In order to account for them, the sell back value of of recycled plastics to companies like TREX must be examined. If recycled plastics continue to sell for 5 cents a pound, the annual return for Winnebago County totals $27,160 which could remedy many of these costs. Barriers that may be encountered include the education of residents and the risk of contamination associated with the clarity of bags. Educational initiatives must be framed for each 11 age bracket present in the Oshkosh area and simplicity must also be emphasized. As stated previously, people age 60 and up have the highest recycling tendency percentages. As such, educational initiatives must be tailored to them through editorials, commercials, radio ads, etc. Younger generations must be catered to differently as they are more invested in social media and the internet. Issues with outside bag clarity must also be addressed. As waste collectors do not step out of their trucks to collect garbage and recyclables, there is concern that garbage may be introduced to the recycling stream if our proposition is enacted...To remedy this situation, a standard for clarity among outside bags for plastic film may be worth pursuing. A final barrier that we encountered was our inability to speak with Mr. David Pellitteri of Pellitteri Waste Systems in Madison, Wisconsin. We left several voicemails and emails with him, but he has not gotten back to us. If the City of Oshkosh is interested in enacting our ordinance, a conversation with him would be very valuable. Mr. Pellitteri is the only stakeholder with access to detailed cost records for Pellitteri Waste Systems’ change-over that allows the facility to recycle curbside plastic film. Stakeholder Identification We spoke with Jennifer Semrau, the Winnebago County Recycling Coordinator at the Tri-County Recycling Facility, about whether plastic film recycling was considered for the facility and what the concerns are for beginning to recycle plastic film. The biggest concerns are the risk of plastic getting caught in the equipment, and the plastic becoming too contaminated or ripped up when dumped onto the collection floor. The facility was renovated from a dual stream to a single stream in 2009, which meant that residents no longer needed to separate their recyclables. During the renovation, research was done on buying special equipment for the processing of plastic film. However, it was deemed too expensive. After the renovation of the 12 facility the amount of material being processed increased from 50,000 tons to 90,000 tons annually. This increase in recyclables is attributed to the ease of recycling for citizens now that they no longer need to separate the material. In order to keep up with the increased material volume the facility has two full-time, eight hour shifts with over 30 employees. If the Tri-County Recycling Center follows the Pellitteri model they would need to educate residents on how to put bags in the recycling bins, and then simply slow their conveyor belt to avoid entanglement. This slowing of the conveyor belt may make it necessary for additional employees for sorting in order to keep with the same level or higher of recyclables. We also spoke with Robert Salm, Public Works Sanitation Manager for the City of Oshkosh. We expressed to him our idea of adding plastic film into the single stream recycling bin, and asked he believed it would affect the street sanitation crew. No new routes would have to be added as the film would be added in with the rest of the single stream material. However, there is a concern about residents putting unwanted materials into the plastic bags. Normally, as the bins are being dumped into the back of the collection trucks a camera is used to observe the refuse as it enters the truck bed. This is to avoid contamination of unwanted materials. Following Madison’s model of placing all film into a single grocery bag may cause a problem if the street crew is unable to see through the bag to ensure only recyclables are entering the stream. It may be necessary to require residents to put their film within a bag of a certain level of clarity which may make it more difficult for residents to comply. However, this could also lead to less contamination entering the stream and allowing for a greater volume of material to be recycled. Summary and Conclusion Due to the relative ease in which Madison began recycling plastic film and the positive response from citizens in Madison we are proposing that Oshkosh follows the Madison model. 13 We are proposing a slowing of the conveyor belt up to the first sorting area where the plastic film would be removed from the line at the Tri-County Recycling Center. This slowing of the conveyor belt would aid workers in removing the added material and avoid the plastic from getting caught in equipment. We suggest that the current recycling and waste management ordinance be added on to include plastic film (Appendix A). This would make plastic film recycling mandatory for all Oshkosh residents. Residents would be required to place all of their plastic film in a regular plastic grocery bag that would then be tied shut and placed in their curbside, single-stream bin. By placing the film in a bag it avoids contamination from being dumped on the receiving floor and from stray pieces of film from getting tangled in the equipment. In order to inform residents of this change an education campaign should be launched that is strategic for all age groups such as video tutorials, newspaper announcements, mail, and online guidelines. No new routes or stops would need to be added to the street sanitation crew, but new employees may need to be hired at the recycling facility. The cost incurred by this could be offset by selling the plastic film.Reducing plastic film waste in our landfill and making recycling more widely available we will reduce contamination of our environment from plastics. This will be beneficial to our citizens’health, environment, and increase the value of economy by improving the health of some our area's greatest natural resources. 14 Works Cited Andrady, A L. "Microplastics in the Marine Environment."Marine Pollution Bulletin (2011): 1596-605. Print. Boerger, C. M., Lattin, G. L., Moore, S. L., &Moore, C. J. Plastic Ingestion by Planktivorous Fishes in the North Pacific Central Gyre.Marine Pollution Bulletin,60 (2010): 2275- 2278. City of Oshkosh.City of Oshkosh Sustainability Plan. Oshkosh: Sustainability Plan Steering Committee, 2012. Print. Cook, Chad. "The Economic Impact of Angling on the Lake Winnebago System."UW Extension Jan. 2007. Print. Derraik, J. B. . The Pollution of the Marine Environment by Plastic Debris: A Review. Marine Pollution Bulletin,44, (2002): 842-852. Devriese, L. I., van der Meulen, M. D., Maes, T., Bekaert, K., Paul-Pont, I., Frere, L., & Robbens, J. Microplastic Contamination in Brown Shrimp (Crangon crangon, Linnaeus 1758) from Coastal Waters of the Southern North Sea and Channel Area.Marine Pollution Bulletin,98 (2015): 179-187. Domina, Tanya and Kathryn Koch. “Convenience and Frequency of Recycling: Implications for Including Textiles in Curbside Recycling Programs.”Environment and Behavior 34.2 (2002): 216-238. Web. 29 March 2016. Gun Kwon, B., Koizumi, K., Chung, S., Kodera, Y., Kim, J., & Saido, K. Global Styrene Oligomers Monitoring as New Chemical Contamination from Polystyrene Plastic Marine (2015) "How big is the "Great Pacific Garbage Patch?”Science vs Myth."Office of Response and Restoration. U.S. Department of Commerce, 7 Feb. 2013. Web. 21 Apr. 2016. Keramitsoglou, Kiriaki M. and Konstantinos P. Tsagarakis. “Public Participation in Designing a Recycling Scheme towards Maximum Public Acceptance.”Resources, Conservation, and Recycling 70 (2013): 55-67. Web. 29 March 2016. McDonald, Seonaidh and Rob Ball. “Public Participation in Plastics Recycling Schemes.” Resources, Conservation, and Recycling 22 (1998): 123-141. Web. 29 March 2016. Moore, C. J., Moore, S. L., Leecaster, M. K., & Weisberg, S. B. A Comparison of Plastic and 15 Plankton in the North Pacific Central Gyre.Marine Pollution Bulletin,42(12), (2001): 1297-1300. Nieforth, Kelly. "Economic Development Strategic Plan."Economic Development Division. City Of Oshkosh,2 Feb. 2016. Web. 21 Apr. 2016. O'Brine, T., & Thompson, R. C. Degradation of Plastic Carrier Bags in the Marine Environment.Marine Pollution Bulletin (2010): 2279-2283. "Scrap Plastic Pricing."PlasticMarkets.org. Moore Recycling Associates, Feb. 2016. Web. 4 Apr. 2016. Thomas, Christine. “Public Understanding and its Effect on Recycling Performance in Hampshire and Milton Keynes.”Resources, Conservation, and Recycling 32 (2001): 259- 274. Web. 29 March 2016. 16 Appendix ●Ordinance: Plastic Bags Recycling ○Definitions: ■Contaminated plastic bag means any plastic that has been in direct contact with, and remains soiled by, organic or inorganic materials. Plastic bags that contain any solid waste are contaminate for the purposes of this ordinance. ■Plastic bag shall mean any bag intended for the transportation, storage, or protection of goods that is made, in part, of plastic film. A plastic bag is not the same as a plastic container. ■Recyclable plastic bag means any clean and dry plastic bag that is able to be recycled, or bundled for recycling purposes, in the Madison area, and includes all those types of plastic bags set forth by the Street Superintendent or designee. ○Every resident disposing, or attempting to dispose of non-contaminated recyclable plastic bags in the City of Oshkosh shall separate such items from solid waste materials. Recyclable plastic film will be placed together in a single clear recyclable plastic bag, tied shut, and placed at curb with other recyclables in accordance with the rules, procedures, and schedules specified by the Street Superintendent, or such recyclable items may be disposed of by such persons in any other lawful manner. ○Non-contaminated recyclable plastic bags shall be separated and recycled in accordance with the rules, procedures and schedules specified by the Street Superintendent, or such items may be disposed of in any other lawful manner, 17 including through merchant provided drop off locations. No person shall mix or permit the mixing of non-contaminate recyclable plastic bags with garbage or other solid waste in violation of such City rules, procedures or schedules. ○Non-contaminated recyclable plastic bags subject to this provision, and capable of being recycled, include: ■Low-density polyethylene bags (LDPE #4).These bags are made of plastic films with high clarity, and moderate stretch and strength characteristics. Such bags include thicker newspaper bags, produce bags and bread bags. ■Linear low density polyethylene bags (LLDPE #4). These bags are made of plastic films with moderate clarity that are stretchy and have a slightly tacky feel. Such bags include clear and thin newspaper bags, as well as dry cleaning bags. ■Medium density polyethylene bags (MDPE #4). These bags are made of plastic films with moderate clarity, and poor stretch and strength characteristics. Such bags include consumer packaging bags such as toilet paper and paper towel packaging. ■High density polyethylene bags (HDPE #2). These bags are made of plastic films with some opacity that are crinkly to the touch, have low stretch, high strength characteristics, and are easily torn. Such bags include most grocery bags and retail bags. ○Enforcement: No enforcement of this subdivision by the City will occur until the Street Superintendent establishes a City-sponsored recycling program for non- 18 contaminated recyclable plastic bags; such program shall be approved by the Common Council by resolution.