10 Draft Integrated Waste Management Plan - City Council - City of ...
10 Draft Integrated Waste Management Plan - City Council - City of ...
10 Draft Integrated Waste Management Plan - City Council - City of ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
2012 Davis <strong>Integrated</strong> <strong>Waste</strong> <strong>Management</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />
Since plastic bags do not significantly contribute to the amount <strong>of</strong> waste going to the landfill, a carryout bag<br />
ordinance is not a priority item to achieve the <strong>City</strong>’s 2020 waste reduction target.<br />
Banning plastic bags may assist in reducing litter, but only minimally. A large percentage <strong>of</strong> storm water from<br />
the streets in Davis (and plastic bags that are swept up in the storm water) pass though screens and detention<br />
ponds where plastic bags are removed from the water before it flows to the Willow Slough Bypass or Yolo<br />
Bypass. Storm drain inlets and the detention ponds themselves are cleaned regularly. Recycling Program staff<br />
rarely receives complaints from street crews regarding plastic bag litter.<br />
Plastic bags at the landfill are blown about by the wind and can contribute to litter. The landfill uses screens to<br />
catch litter that is blown by the wind, but some litter escapes these screens. The <strong>City</strong> <strong>of</strong> Davis is only one<br />
contributor to the material at the landfill. Banning bags in Davis will not alleviate the bag problem at the YCCL<br />
unless all the other cities adopt similar laws. At this point in time, none <strong>of</strong> the other cities in Yolo County, nor<br />
the County itself, are pursuing a carryout bag ordinance.<br />
Plastic bags are also an issue for DWR, where they are a litter issue and a nuisance at their recycling facility.<br />
DWR’s customers live in and around Davis, banning plastic bags may have a significant impact in litter<br />
reduction for DWR.<br />
One <strong>of</strong> the concerns with banning plastic bags and not paper bags is the potential increase in the amount <strong>of</strong><br />
paper bags being used, and the possible increase in paper bags going into the landfill. In the <strong>City</strong> <strong>of</strong> Manhattan<br />
Beach vs. Save the Plastic Bag Coalition, the Court report stated:<br />
On this record, it is undisputed that the manufacture, transportation, recycling, and landfill disposal <strong>of</strong><br />
paper bags entail more negative environmental consequences than do the same aspects <strong>of</strong> the plastic<br />
bag “life cycle.”<br />
Since a paper bag weighs more than a plastic bag, the effect <strong>of</strong> paper bags on the waste stream is more<br />
substantial.<br />
Paper bags are accepted for recycling curbside and in all DWR recycling bins. In Davis, plastic bags can only<br />
be recycled at grocery stores. This should make it more likely that paper bags will be recycled instead <strong>of</strong><br />
landfilled.<br />
DRAFT<br />
Plastic bags are not accepted by DWR for recycling. A recycling option does exist however—AB 2449 requires<br />
large grocery stores and pharmacies to take back plastic bags for recycling, so residents can bring their plastic<br />
bags back to the store for recycling. However, this system hasn’t been very effective. According to CAW, in<br />
California, 14 billion plastic bags are distributed annually, and only 3% are recycled. AB 2449 requires grocery<br />
stores to take back plastic bags for recycling, but the law sunsets at the end <strong>of</strong> 2012.<br />
The ending <strong>of</strong> AB 2449 creates a potential recycling challenge, but may create an opportunity for future bag<br />
bans. AB 2449 expressly disallowed charging a fee for plastic bags, while allowing one for paper. Once AB<br />
2449 ends, it would be possible to rewrite the <strong>City</strong>’s draft ordinance to allow single-use plastic bags as long as<br />
stores charge a fee, as is required for paper bags under the current draft ordinance. This may eliminate some <strong>of</strong><br />
the opposition to the draft ordinance that the <strong>City</strong> encountered as the draft was prepared.<br />
A bill was introduced (AB 298) that would have extended the plastic bag recycling provisions <strong>of</strong> 2449 while<br />
limiting the use <strong>of</strong> plastic and paper carryout bags statewide (see Appendix H for the full text <strong>of</strong> this bill).<br />
However, the bill did not pass the senate.<br />
Page | 7-61