Curb service: most U.S. cities retain curbside collection service despite the municipal budget pressures they face

Recycling Today, Sept, 2004 by Brian Taylor, Dan Sandoval, Deanne Toto

Recycling advocates have watched with dismay as large cities facing budget cuts have scaled back or, in a few cases, eliminated curbside recycling programs in recent years.

When several such program cuts occur in a short time period, it can certainly create an impression that curbside recycling is entering a declining phase.

Overall numbers determining the health of curbside recycling can be difficult to monitor, as villages, cities, counties and the haulers that serve them do not report their activities monthly to a central database.

What a brief survey of solid waste and recycling officials in America's largest cit les has found is that most larger cities still provide recycling services with a curbside collection component.

Participation by residents can vary widely, as can publicity efforts, materials accepted and other factors that can affect exactly how many tons of material are collected through curbside efforts.

The list of largest curbside programs may more accurately represent a list of the 20 curbside programs with the greatest potential to be among the nation's largest. The attention paid in maximizing material collected can vary greatly from city to city, but these 20 programs currently offer curbside collection to the greatest number of households.

As is always the case when compiling such lists, our accuracy depends mightily on the amount of cooperation received from potential candidates. Representatives from some cities have provided what should be a current and accurate figure. Others provide a figure on their city government Web sites or have provided figures for media coverage in the recent past.

Unfortunately, programs in some cities might belong on this list, but we were unable to confirm a reliable number to

attach to the program. And certainly, it is possible the we overlooked a medium-sized city or a regional solid waste district operating a program that is worthy of making this list.

If you are affiliated with a program that should have been on the list, please let us know so that we can let our readers know. You can contact Editor Brian Taylor at btaylor@gie.net.

FACING THE CHALLENGES. Speakers at a panel at the 2004 Paper Recycling Conference designed to address the stares of curbside programs acknowledged budget challenges but also cited success stories.

Despite the problems many cities are facing, a number of cities, as well as private sector businesses, are stepping into the breach to ensure that curbside recycling programs remain in place, according to speakers at the session, held in late June in Atlanta.

David Robinson, Recycling Coordinator with the city of Philadelphia, noted some of the successes of his city's program. Along with enhancing public education, the city has developed an effective partnership program with some private sector companies in the Philadelphia area. These companies include recycling-based companies as well as large businesses that can assist the city with community outreach and advertising programs.

The FCR Inc. subsidiary of Casella Waste Systems, one of the largest material recovery facility (MRF) operators in the country, has had success developing recycling programs in a host of cities. Bill Leonidas, with FCR, based in Charlotte, N.C., notes that a key to running a successful curbside collection program is the ability to both boost the volume of recyclables as well as improve the quality of the collected material.

Leonidas said that if a city could increase its recyclables collection rate from 12 percent to 25 percent, the net result would be that the per-pound cost of recycling would drop by 50 percent, making collection more cost-effective.

While volume and quality of the material are important, other issues that need to be looked at include collection and processing efficiencies and planning for the fluctuating values of the commodities being collected.

To improve the efficiencies in processing, the group responsible for the activity should look toward using improved technology to lower the per-ton cost. For collection efficiencies, routes should be optimized to increase the amount of material collected on a run, panelists remarked.

POTENTIAL GIANTS. The list of cities appearing on our 20 Largest Curbside Programs chart may more accurately be considered a list of the potentially largest programs. Many cities put contracts in place to serve all their residential neighborhoods--but this by no means guarantees that the tonnage they are collecting puts them among the 20 largest on that list.

Judging the largest programs by participation, tonnage collected and quality of material collected would, unfortunately, require uniform reporting standards and verifiable figures provided both by cities and their processing partners.

Effectiveness notwithstanding, many of the largest cities also have the (potentially) largest programs. But the 20 Largest list does not follow in line with America's largest cities by population. Among the larger cities not making the list are Houston and Detroit, while smaller cities that provide comprehensive service, thus leapfrogging larger cities, include Albuquerque and Fort Worth.