Thursday, April 29, 2010

SB 234: Economic Efficiency of Single Stream Recycling

Yesterday, I highlighted my updated present value analysis of the benefits of reducing landfill accumulation. In my second excerpt from my comments on SB 234, I focus on the economic efficiencies of a single stream system:
Single stream collection and handling is far more efficient than older methods that require household sorting and separate handling every step of the way.
These efficiencies are clearly illustrated by comparing the curbside programs run by the City of Wilmington and the Delaware Solid Waste Authority (DSWA). The DSWA runs a voluntary program that reaches about one out of every seven Delaware households, and until recently required sorting and separate handling. The DSWA charges $72 a year, and loses money on the program even though it has switched to single stream recycling.
The City of Wilmington serves all households, does not require sorting or separate handling, and uses its existing trash collection crews and trucks. The net cost to the City, even in a depressed commodity market, is less than $8 per household per year. If commodity prices were to recover, the net cost would be less than $3 per household per year.
Despite these economic benefits, it is worth noting that environmentalists are not entirely happy about having to give up a long cherished victory: the bottle bill passed nearly three decades ago.

3 Comments:

Anonymous Steve said...

SB 234 includes a NEW "SALES TAX" for Delaware.

ENVIRONMENTALISTS are NOT HAPPY with giving up the bottle bill! A new bottle bill AND curbside recycling is needed. Bottle bill states have better access to curbside recycling. Bottle bill states recycle about three times more bottles and cans than curbside only states. Bottle bills reduce litter, this is important, Delaware is an ocean state with scenic beauty.

But many are happy to finally not be 10-20 years behind other states with curbside recycling and realize that the bottle bill, in Delaware only, may be a failure because of the failure for years to update it. This is why some environmentalists are currently fighting for curbside recycling to pass, rather than fighting for a bottle bill update also.

2:21 PM, April 29, 2010  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This Steve isn't from Delaware, is a plant and part of the sham effort to actually kill recycling while pretending to support it.

3:29 PM, April 29, 2010  
Anonymous Chris said...

I have lived in Delaware for 4 years now. Previously I lived in Michigan where they have a very effective deposit program on all types of containers. I believe in keeping a bottle deposit program in DE.

We know that the retailers and grocers have joined forces with environmentalist legislators to try to kill the Bottle Bill. The Bottle Bill preserves glass and plastic as separate recyclables.

With the Bottle Bill gone, legislators are putting a 4 cent per bottle sales tax on certain soda bottles. They say the sales tax will sunset in 4 to 5 years, but who honestly believes that?!

Steve is right. In fact we're supposed to be a sales tax free state! We market ourselves as a sales tax free state! It will be a lie now! Call it what you want, "recycle fee", "user fee", whatever, a tax is a tax!

I see no reason why we can't use the unclaimed deposit money to pay for the new recycling program instead of a SALES TAX!!!

11:25 AM, April 30, 2010  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home