10 Draft Integrated Waste Management Plan - City Council - City of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2012 Davis Integrated Waste Management Plan There are several issues that repeatedly come up with the current street sweeping policy. In some areas of town, when the street sweepers come by there are usually cars parked on the street, limiting DWR’s access to the gutters and virtually eliminating the usefulness of a weekly street sweeping program. Switching to a less frequent street sweeping schedule may help, as residents would be incentivized to move their cars on that particular day. Some areas of Davis do not need as much street sweeping as others. Neighborhoods with fewer mature trees do not receive as much debris in the gutter as neighborhoods with many mature trees. If the City were to consider an alternative street sweeping policy, it may be possible to maximize street sweeping in core areas, and minimize sweeping in other areas that do not have the same need. A survey of which streets need frequent sweeping could be done now, and some streets could immediately be cut back to an every other week or monthly sweeping schedule. Street sweeping is also a contract issue with DWR. It must be recognized that if the City wants to change the street sweeping policy, it has to be reflected in the contract and the City would need to give DWR adequate time to adjust to a service change (likely six month’s notice for any service changes). It is possible to perform street sweeping monthly or every other week during off-peak leaf drop seasons. For example, from winter to summer, streets could be swept once a month. During the leaf drop season, streets could be swept weekly. Downtown areas could be swept every other week. It is important to consider that decreasing street sweeping and removing yard materials collection may lead to a build-up of leaves on the street. Some waste consultants have noted that residents may sweep fallen leaves into piles for collection, but will not scoop them up to place in yard material carts. Policy could be considered that would cite residents if they allow leaves and debris to block storm drain inlets, etc. 5.5.2 Alternative Collection System Instead of having a multiple bin system for customers with a trash bin, paper recycling cart, comingled recycling cart and organics cart, the City could switch to a wet/dry collection system. With such a system only two carts or bins would need to be provided to customers. One bin would collect “wet” materials, compostable organics such as food scraps, yard materials and food soiled paper, while the other bin would collect everything else, dry trash and recyclables. The organics would be sent for composting, while the other dry materials would be sorted at DWR. The mixed dry material would need to be processed through both the paper and comingled sorting lines in order to have all the materials properly sorted out, but the end result should be a higher diversion DRAFT than is currently achieved through the multiple-bin system. This system would require a complete change in the current collection system—including replacing the split-recycling carts currently in use for single-family residential customers and the recycling carts used by commercial customers. This system may also require DWR to obtain a Solid Waste Facility Permit from CalRecycle. See Appendix T for details of a similar project proposal. 5.5.3 Expansion of Materials Accepted One alternative to consider is to expand the list of items acceptable for recycling. Page | 5-30
2012 Davis Integrated Waste Management Plan 5.5.3.1 Expansion of Materials Accepted in Recycling Carts As listed above, there are several types of materials that are not accepted for recycling in the recycling carts. Items that currently have recycling markets are discussed below. Electronics are not recommended for collection in recycling carts as they can be damaged in collection and transport, releasing hazardous chemicals. Electronics are best suited for drop-off recycling program, not automated collection in recycling carts. Electronics will be discussed in further detail in section 10.2.2. Plastic bags and other clean plastic film could potentially be collected for recycling, but when co-mingled with other recyclables, the plastic film is easily contaminated by liquid wastes during collection, giving the material a very low recycling value. Contaminated plastic film does not have a stable recycling market. Expanded polystyrene (EPS) does have a recycling market, although not a very reliable or profitable one. Collecting EPS curbside is not a viable option as the material gets dirty when mixes with other recyclables and renders it unacceptable for most recycling markets. Cartons, such as milk cartons and juice boxes do have a recycling market available. Refrigerated cartons, such as milk cartons, are mostly paper, with layers of plastic on the inside and outside. Shelf-stable cartons, such as juice boxes, are paper cartons lined with plastic, with a layer of aluminum and another layer of plastic on the inside. The Carton Council, a group of carton manufacturers that assist in setting up recycling markets and systems for cartons, has expressed interest in setting up a market in the Sacramento area. The Carton Council estimates that cartons make up 0.5% of the residential waste stream. The 2008 CIWMB Waste Characterization Study listed cartons under “All Other Remainder/Composite Paper” which makes up 4.5% of the total waste stream: All Other Remainder/Composite Paper means items made mostly of paper but combined with large amounts of other materials such as wax, plastic, glues, foil, food, and moisture, that also are not packaging for items other than food. Examples include some waxed or plastic-impregnated corrugated cardboard (common for packaging produce or seafood), aseptic packages, plastic-coated paper milk cartons, waxed paper, tissue, paper towels, blueprints, sepia, onion skin, fast food wrappers, carbon paper, self adhesive notes, and photographs. DRAFT It may be possible to upgrade the sorting system at the DWR sorting facility to add another sorting station so that another material can be pulled off the sorting line and separated for recycling. However, cartons exist in such small amounts in the waste stream as to make collection cost prohibitive, especially due to the small size of Davis. Larger jurisdictions may be able to service a large enough area and collect enough material to make collection profitable. A drop-off recycling program may be a better option for these materials. 5.5.3.2 Expansion of Materials Accepted for Drop-off Recycling Another way to expand the materials that are recyclable is to offer drop-off recycling at the DWR recycling center. This way, the recyclables are pre-sorted and must only be allocated a space to collect them and time to process and bale them before sale. If local markets existed for the following items, this may be the simplest and economical way to collect and recycle these items: Cartons (milk, juice, etc.) Electronics (will be discussed further in section 10.2.2) Page | 5-31
Page 1 and 2: DRAFT
Page 3 and 4: 2012 Davis Integrated Waste Managem
Page 45: 2012 Davis Integrated Waste Managem
Page 97 and 98:
2012 Davis Integrated Waste Managem
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259:
show all

10 Draft Integrated Waste Management Plan - City Council - City of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?