2005 Recycling Pilot Program Report

Home

accarding to a Waste Management officiai, paper collected dual-stream is added to the single-stream processing line "to improve the overall quality of the end groduct." Four paper mills in the Midwest were contacted to gauge their opinions on paper quality. Some of the mills had installed new or upgraded cleaning, sorting and handling equipment to separate out unwanted mate�ial, but they said that was an industry trend not directly tied to any one MRF. While they chose not to give details of the�r relationships with ariy MRFs, ihey said they did not have any problems with paper quality froin any of their suppliers including the Waste Management/Recycle America Alliance (WM/RAA) MRF. One mill did say it preferred not to use paper from single-stream MRFs. Surveys Roseville conducted two mail surveys — before and after. Near the end of the "before" period, Roseville sent residents in the test areas a pilot progra.m inh'oduction letter and survey. The survey was similar to the ones used by Eagan and Red Wing in the RMP study. The primary putposes of these surveys were to remind residents what was accepted in the program and to have them engage in self reflection about their recycling habits. Residents were asked to identify what ihey recycle and give a reason(s) why they don't recycle oiher items. There were two policy relaied questians asked: �n+hat currently motivates you to recycle; and what would motivate you to recycle more. With three weeks to go in the "duxing" period Roseville mailed a reminder letter stating that the pilot program was coming to an end and a satisfaction survey. Participants were asked about their satisfactian vvith the tested method and if they would be willing to pay more for a change in servic�. Additionally the residents were asked what they liked and disliked about the tested rn�ethod. Finally they vsrere asked to rank what was most important to them in designing a recycling program. Their choices were: how convenient the program is to use; the price they have to pay; how much the program benefits t.he environrr�ent; and the amount of information the City sends about recycling. Residents in the single-stream test areas were also asked if they were concerned about related issues that had been raised by �nembers of the public during discussions of single-stream recycling at the City Council in the summer of 2003. Those issue choices were: national research showing single-strearn collection costs go down while locally pxices are going up; lack of competition for sing�e-sCream servzce; potential for more material to be damaged due to additional processing or contamination aY the curb. Survey Results Study participants were sent two mail surveys — one at the end of the "before" period called the pre--survey and one at the end of the "during" period called the post-survey. T'he pre-survey was designed to reinforce messages about what is accepted in the City's recycling program as well as elicit information on resident's current recycling behaviors and beliefs. Forty-nine percent of the pariicipants responded to the pre-survey. To be statistically valid, mail surveys typically require a 30-40% response rate. When asked about their current recycling habits, residents reflected answers given in the 2002 survey (a�ailable at http://www.ci.roseville.mn.us/info/waste/index.htm} and the focus groups — they are nat putting 22