My favorite kind of recycling

Some may wrongly believe I’m against recycling, especially if you’ve read my last few posts on the matter.  However, this isn’t the case.  I’m very much for recycling, just not my garbage.

This week the City of San Antonio puts some of that tax money that I send them to use.  Monday begins “bulky-item” pick up.  This service includes such things as old washing machines, water heaters, worn-out couches, and pretty much anything except brush.  Not only does the City come by to pick up my “useless” items, so do scavengers.  

Yesterday, I placed out to be picked up an old metal filing cabinet and my front gutter (aka - leaf catcher).  I had to cut the gutter into sections with shears to make it somewhat easy to collect.  Today those items are gone!  Instead of sitting in some landfill, I have (proudly, mind you) recycled those items.

Transactions costs = zero!  Taxpayer money involved = zero!  Lesson in recycling = priceless!

My response to San Antonio: Recycling

Here's my response to the letter from the Director, San Antonio Solid Waste Management.

Mr. McCary,

Thank you for the prompt reply regarding my concerns over the City’s recycling program.  From your letter, it sounds as if the City has done quite well with the recycling program.  And while you did note the program’s revenue stream of nearly $3 million dollars, you forgot to mention the program’s cost.  Without this all-important figure, fairly judging the program is impossible.

Can you please provide me the last three years of financial data for San Antonio’s recycling program? Copies of the balance sheet and income statement would suffice.

Costs of Recycling

In your letter, you proudly point out that the city has generated $3 million in revenue from recycling operations.  And, as I point out above, this is only half the story.  If, for example, the costs of the program were $4 million dollars, the return on investment is negative and the loses are surely borne by ratepayers.  Expanding a money-losing enterprise at the expense of taxpayers for the sake of achieving lofty recycling goals seems hardly worthwhile and a poor use of scarce funds, particularly if the planned expansion will only increase those losses.

Another cost passed on to ratepayers, and one often overlooked by city officials, is the cost of segregating trash from recyclables.  Under traditional garbage collection, all material is placed into one container, and the time required of the homeowner is minimal.  Recycling upends the division of labor, forcing the homeowner to cull through his trash in search of recyclables.  Often, those recyclables require some form of preparation (rinsing the dirty bottle, for example) before placement into a separate container.  City officials have essentially externalized the cost of labor.  And as more recycling is introduced (you mention organics as the next phase) the more labor will be required of the homeowner.

Another obvious cost is the capital investment in rolling stock, wages and benefits for drivers and machine operators, additional administrative costs, and the additional pollution emitted by all this machinery.  For instead of one truck collecting my trash once per week, there are now two trucks.

Lastly, I’m somewhat concerned by your goal of “a zero waste society”, and I presume that to mean abandoning landfills.  When did dumping our trash into landfills become undesirable?  Modern landfills, equipped with sanitary liners and soil-monitoring devices are one of the most environmentally sensitive and economically efficient manner of disposing of our trash.  Landfills are highly regulated, emit combustible gasses that can be captured for electric generation, and can be converted into golf courses and other recreational uses after they are closed.  Recycling, while touted as a cost efficient and green alternative to traditional waste disposal, often isn’t.

I look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,

Brad D.

Response from Government Officials on Recycling

Below is the email I received from the director of San Antonio’s Solid Waste Department.  Notice that while Mr. McCary noted the recycling program’s revenue stream, he conveniently forgot to the program’s cost.

I’m working on a reply, and perhaps the Prof can give me some pointers.  One of the City’s goals is Zero Waste, whatever that means.  Would that not also mean zero consumption?  Of course, this isn’t what’s implied.  I guess throwing trash in a landfill is no longer in vogue. 

City officials are always hatching up schemes designed to “be green”.  Often, these so-called green initiatives are any but, and taxpayers are left holding the bag.  It’s time we hold them accountable and question every proposal they put forward.

Dear Mr. Dunnagan:

Thank you for your inquiry about the City of San Antonio ’s recycling program.

Our 10 year strategic plan “Creating a Pathway to Zero Waste” established the goal to increase our recycling rate to 60% by the year 2020.  Regarding your question, why not target 75% by the year 2020. The original discussion was to increase our recycling rate to 40% by 2020. This means a changed based on available resources. We wanted to be considerate of our rate payer fees and required resources. The plan called for creating a focus group comprised of residents appointed by City Council members and a solid waste consulting firm, R.W. Beck jointly worked to develop the goal. The overarching goal is to get to a zero waste society as quickly as possible.

The Solid Waste Management Department will continue to re-evaluate the plan every three years to determine progress and if the recycling rate goal should be increased. As you mentioned, not everything is recyclable.  But we have a variety of programs that will help us meet our ambitious goal.  Since our transition from the 18-gallon bins to the 96-gallon carts we have more than tripled our recycling rate from 5% to 21%.  We also changed our mixed bulk and brush collection program into separate cycles.  This separation will allow us to increase the brush recycling rate by another 7 points to 28%.  We are also in the development phase of the curbside organics recovery program. Our organics recovery program is scheduled to begin mid August for 30,000 customers.  This program will further improve our recycling rate.

In regards to your concerns about economic efficiency, last year our recycling program generated over three million dollars in revenue. This money helped to subsidizes our collection and allows our monthly rates to remain one of the lowest in Texas .

Thank you for your inquiry and if you should have any other questions, please feel free to contact me.

David