Conlin: A Zero Waste Strategy for Seattle

This is very, very cool. From Councilmember Richard Conlin's Making It Work newsletter:

Every week, the garbage train hauls 1500 tons of waste from Seattle to be dumped in a hole in the ground in Eastern Washington.  If we don’t want these mile-long trains to continue – and maybe get even bigger – in the future, we have to make some changes.    We need a dramatic reshaping of our strategy if we are to truly realize our aspirations for a sustainable Seattle.  As Chair of the Environmental, Emergency Management, and Utilities Committee, I propose that Seattle adopt a Zero Waste Strategy that would dramatically change both our goals and our waste management plan.

We have a unique opportunity to do this, because the contracts for collection and processing our solid waste are up for renewal in the near future.  At the same time, Seattle Public Utilities has proposed a new facilities plan that will involve overhauling and rebuilding its two transfer stations, and building a new city-owned intermodal facility to transfer garbage directly to trains.  If we don’t make different decisions in the coming months, this $200 million construction program and a set of long-term contracts will commit us to continuing the present path.

Seattle’s current path has many positive aspects – we have an excellent
recycling program and a progressive set of policies.    In the 1980’s, the
commitment of our citizens to environmental values and the emerging concept of sustainability led the City to reject a plan to incinerate wastes and instead embrace a commitment to recycling a minimum of 60% of our solid waste.  Twenty years later, recycling has peaked at 43% -- a good achievement, but short of our goal.  The current strategy promises only incremental improvements and a long-term commitment to generate massive quantities of garbage and ship it to a landfill.

That means that we will continue to consume resources at an expanding rate.
It means that we will keep burying toxic substances and valuable materials.
And it means that we will keep generating greenhouse gases from landfills that contribute to global warming.

That doesn’t have to be our future.  We can take a different approach – and get better results.  The Zero Waste Strategy sets a new goal:  striving to reduce our waste stream to the minimum possible by making cradle to cradle responsibility the cornerstone for how we treat products.  The cradle to cradle paradigm asserts that the materials we consume should continue to circulate in the production of new products, either as organic matter destined for compost or as mineral or synthetic compounds that can be transformed into the building blocks of other products.  That puts waste reduction and recycling in the driver’s seat, rather than in the caboose of the garbage train.

Here are the components that I am suggesting as possible building blocks for the Zero Waste strategy:

Expand our recycling efforts by creating incentives for product stewardship.
The principle of product stewardship (also called extended producer responsibility) puts the responsibility for recycling and disposal on the manufacturers, thus giving them a financial incentive to extend the life of their products by using materials that can be reused or recycled. Instead of collecting garbage every week, recycling every other week, and yard waste/organics every other week – and charging for the organics pickup, we could expand the items collected in recycling and organics cans, collect them both every week, stop charging people to recycle their organics, and move to collecting the remaining garbage every other week.

Tailor similar approaches to commercial accounts, emphasizing programs like food waste collection from restaurants and paper recycling from offices. Instead of operating transfer stations designed to encourage people to drive their own excess waste to the stations (often inextricably mixed with valuable recyclables), we can create an on-demand pickup of extra waste at a comparable charge, reducing traffic congestion and fuel consumption, and encouraging separated recyclable and compostable pick up.

Decrease waste production by banning some products from use in the City (such as Styrofoam and plastic bags), and working with businesses to develop take back programs for products like pharmaceuticals, paint, and electronic products.
Begin salvaging urban hardwood and designating highest use practices.
Currently, city trees are disposed of as waste by burning, land-filling or mulching.

Design our solid waste facilities and contracts to:

Emphasize flexibility to allow for better waste prevention, recycling, and disposal systems in the future; Support full recycling of Construction and Demolition Waste; Size for major reductions in the amount of solid waste to be transferred and disposed of; Plan for a major reduction in self-haul to be replaced by on-demand scheduled, fee-based, pickup that includes recyclables and compostables.

This is the long-term direction that I am suggesting.  Over the next few months, I want the City to invest in developing a strategic analysis that assesses the feasibility of these kinds of measures, and design specific steps that will lead us towards the zero waste goal.

The current facilities plan may not leave enough flexibility and may over build the transfer and disposal function.  It should be reconsidered and redesigned to reflect this strategy, as should the collection and disposal contracts.  A new set of parameters could be developed for the facilities plan, including possible private ownership and operation of an intermodal facility, possible continuance of the current intermodal system, and possible abandonment of the north transfer station site.  Action on reconstructing the transfer stations should be moved forward as expeditiously as possible to improve worker safety and ease of operation.

As this strategy is developed, the possibility of further change should be kept in mind.  Disposal is always the lowest priority for waste, but the City should also explore (in conjunction with the County) the possibility of changing from a landfill disposal plan to a plan based around the new and more environmentally promising thermal reclamation plant models coming on line in Europe.  However, this exploration is a separate track from the Zero Waste Strategy, and should be pursued in a separate set of policy development discussions.