Harvest - Organic Waste Recycling Study

Aside from legal mandates governing Connecticut’s recycling requirements, Connecticut has an opportunity to reduce the pollutants their citizens contribute to the earth and simultaneously provide healthier living conditions and increased employment opportunities as it reaches its goal of 40% recycling/source reduction (NERC).  Although significant strides have been made by government efforts, current legal requirements of 25% waste recycling levels have not yet been reached as, according to Connecticut’s Public Interest Research Group, Connecticut citizens “burn more trash every year compared to any other state in the country and generate more than half a million tons of toxic ash each year” (Sullivan).

The purpose of this report is to highlight the current state of Connecticut’s recycling program, where improvements can be made, and the benefits those improvements will bestow on Connecticut citizens as well as on our eco-system. The report will be presented by examining the current efforts such as promoting recycling on college campuses, opportunities showing more efficient solutions supported by a process flow diagram illustrating the path from waste pickup to its ultimate repurposing, understanding the program SWOT, and supplementing with results section and financial analysis in support of those recommendations. A conclusion will be provided as a summation of the adaptations which can be made to more efficiently administer Connecticut’s recycling efforts and, ultimately, bring the state into legal compliance.

Currently, much of the municipal solid waste (MSW) generated in Connecticut is either burned at a Resource Recovery Facility (RRF) or transferred to out-of-state landfills at significant cost (Sullivan).  Significant achievements have been made to bring together the efforts of citizens and public offices alike to make substantial improvements since the recycling programs were enacted in 1991 (DEEP).

Connecticut’s current process of redirecting waste is not only costing taxpayers in terms of expending monies to manage those wastes, but such practices are also costing taxpayers in lost opportunity.  Retaining biodegradable waste and repurposing it into compostable materials presents an opportunity to market fresh, clean composting to both in-state and out-of-state growers, as was the case in Grant County, Washington (Derek Pohle).  It will further save on the costs of out-of-state disposal and provide an additional source of income as the methane gases created during the composting processes are captured and sold as a source of clean fuel (Thorat, Agarwal and Finuliar). Methane gasses are a gaseous product of the decomposition of organic matter.  After processing to purity standards, it becomes a renewable natural gas and can be utilized to fuel natural gas vehicles (U.S. Department of Energy).  

Retaining the biodegradable waste which is currently being directed out of the state will not only save Connecticut taxpayers the cost of that diversion, but it can provide the state’s coffers with additional revenue from the sale of clean compost, the sale of methane gas, and the cost savings and environmental benefit of operating government and privately-owned vehicles with the fuel created during the process.  Whether the state collects such biodegradable matter or provides compost bins for citizens’ individual usage, the state stands to save considerable funds and, in turn, provide environmental benefit in reducing the expense of handling waste (Harvest: Power of We).

The following process flow diagram shows the closed-process recycling efforts from the beginning creation of consumer waste, through to the collection and delivery to one of Connecticut’s existing RRF centers, the processing of that waste into reusable composting for public sale as well as biofuel for use in public and private vehicles, and the ultimate sale of those goods on the public market.

SWOT Analysis  

Strengths:  the primary strength in this opportunity is the ability to convert waste into useful, marketable product which ultimately serves to not only address recycling issues but also provide an additional source of revenue to the state of Connecticut. Weaknesses: While the issues of biodegradable waste and recycling material may have been addressed, there are still goods, such as e-waste, which Connecticut must devote resources in order find better, more environmentally-friendly means of disposing.  Opportunities: Significant opportunity presents itself to further improve Connecticut’s overall waste management efforts while earning additional revenue for state programs.  Threats: Concerns from citizens as to the safety and effectiveness of these programs, along with the financial impact on companies operating in Connecticut which sell competing goods resulting from Connecticut’s recycling efforts.  

Results

Key data obtained through studies by the Environmental Protection Agency indicated that, collectively, Americans only recycled approximately 34 percent of its 250 million tons of trash as of 2010 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).  Some of the benefits of recycling is the amount of aluminum that will be salvaged. In addition to the obvious benefits of eliminating those waste materials from our lands and waters, recycling also provides economic benefits from the recycling outputs as well as jobs created to fulfill the additional needs associated with the processes of the recycling.  Further, studies indicate that more than 30 percent of home and business solid waste, less recyclables, consists of organic material. “Separation of that waste through yard waste receptacles has been implemented in many urban areas and has served as a critical factor in protecting the environment, protecting natural resources, reducing energy consumption, saving money, and creating jobs” (State of California).

Conclusion

The benefits of expanding current recycling efforts to include biodegradable waste and, in turn, eliminating the necessity and expense of redirecting that waste to another jurisdiction will provide Connecticut residents significant strides toward their goals of waste reduction and also provide an additional source of revenue and, potentially, more jobs.  The clear results point toward the ecological, financial, and economic boon Connecticut would enjoy by implementing the changes and directing efforts to expanding the current waste management recycling program.

Recommendation 

Increased investment now in expanding the current waste management/ recycling programs throughout the state of Connecticut is a measure which will not only serve to bring Connecticut closer to legal compliance mandates, but it will also serve to reduce the destruction of the environment by Connecticut residents and businesses, it will provide Connecticut additional funds through the savings of the current expenses of sending waste out of state as well as through the sale of the converted waste materials into useable organic goods, it will provide additional jobs serving as an economic boon, and it will result in a greater sense of community pride throughout the state. Measures to address citizen concerns as to health and safety issues should be addressed through public education efforts and establishing tax incentives and credits should be utilized to encourage citizens to contribute to these efforts. Further, studies should be conducted as to optimal land areas for establishing recycling centers, as well as to establish distribution channels for the final goods.  

Projections for establishing such facilities can run “$28 per ton to landfill waste compared with $147 a ton to recycle.” Programs similar to that which has been proposed in this study indicate that selling recyclable goods can bring a jurisdiction $2.45 million on the return of their investment after factoring in the typical $3 million annual costs for collecting and sorting.  While the cost of establishing one facility is exorbitant, the gradual capital recoupment is supplemented with the invaluable environmental and health benefits of recycling (Ettehadieh). 

Works Cited

DEEP. "Recycling . . . It's the Law." 2012. Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. http://www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?a=2714&q=324896&deepNav_GID=1645.

Derek Pohle, P.E. "Feasibility Study for an Organic Waste Recyling Program in Grant County." Grant County Public Works Department. Grant County Public Works, January 2006. http://www.grantcountyweb.com/GCPW/Solid-Waste/MISC/PDF/2012/OrganicWasteFeasibilityStudy.pdf.

Ettehadieh, Daniel. "Cost-Benefit Analysis of Recycling in the United States: Is Recycling Worth It?" Spring 2011. University of Maryland Interpolations. http://www.english.umd.edu/interpolations/2601.

Harvest: Power of We. "The Road to Zero Waste: SSO Superheroes in Austin." 7 June 2012. HarvestPower.com. http://blog.harvestpower.com/the-road-to-zero-waste-sso-superheroes-in-austin/.

NERC. "Connecticut Recycles." n.d. North American Electric Reliability Corporation. http://www.nerc.org/documents/town_business/ct/ct_fact_sheet_sharon_salisbury.pdf. 

State of California. "What Can Be Recycled." 28 March 2013. CalRecycle.com. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/PublicEd/EarthDay/What.htm.

Sullivan, Kelsey. "The New Green: Eliminating One Way Trash Flows." 9 October 2012. UConn Daily Campus. http://www.dailycampus.com/focus/the-new-green-eliminating-one-way-trash-flows-1.2931771#.UZL6uaKG1GI.

Thorat, Preeti, et al. "“From Garbage to Harvest." Summer 2011. Santa Clara University. http://www.scu.edu/socialbenefit/programs/frugalinnovation/upload/team_garbage_to_harvest.pdf.

U.S. Department of Energy. "Alternative Fuels Data Center." 2013. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/emerging_biogas.html.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States: Facts and Figures for 2010." 2010. http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/msw_2010_rev_factsheet.pdf.