2005 Recycling Pilot Program Report

Home

out for collection all the paper they could. Thirteen percent of the recyclers said they never put out junk mail for collection and nearly 8% did not recycle boxboard. When asked why they put recyclable material in the h'ash, more than half of the respondents said it was contarninated with food oz other debris. Almost a fifth of respo:ndents said they were unsure about what to recycle, fallowed by 12°/a who said the bin was too small, 8% said that sorting was too difficult or they did not have enough room. Some residents did volunteer on the survey forrn that iheir Table 8 Do Yoa Put Recyclable Material i�u the Trash 53% IYs contaminated with food or other debris 19% We're unsure about what io recycle 92% Bin is too small 8% Sorting is too difficult 8% Not enough room in garage difficulty with sorting was because they were still putting material into seven different categories. They wroie that they were not aware that Roseville uses a two-sort system Nearly all the current recyclers said they participated in the program because they felt recycling was good for the e:nvironment (90%) and/or recycling reduced the anaount of material that went to iandfills or other means of disposal (88°/a). Seventy percent said they recycle out of civic duty, 51% recycled to help the economy and 42% recycle in order to reduce their garbage bill. Tab1e 9 What woald motivate you to 39% Financial rebate 32% Larger bins 27% Weekly co[�ection 25% More information on how/what to When asked what vvould motivate them to recycle tr�oze, more residents said give them money. T�urty-nine percent said a financial rebate would spur them to recycle more. That was followed by 32°/a who said larger bins, 27% who said weekly collection and 25% who said znore information on whatlhow to recycle would rnotivate them to recycle more. A number of conn.munities offer residents financial incentives to participate in ihe recycling program. These programs range from rebates for participation and rewards given to selected participants to fines for non- participation. This pilot program did not involve financial incentives. However, research into fina.ncial incentive programs was conducted through a literature review and by talking to officia�s in cities with such programs. More information on incentive progranr�s is in the chapter Financial Tncentives. Fifty-one percent of participants responded to the post-survey. Mernbers of each test area said they prefenred the collec�ion method they tested. The highest satisfaction rates were in the single-streaan test areas. Ninety-two percent of the respondents in the Contrast area preferred single-stream, followed by 90% of respondents in the Single-Stream area that preferred their tested method, 69% of respondents in the Two Bin area prefened their method and 62% of 23 Table '{0 Do You Prefer Your New Method of Collechon 92.5% Single-stream Contrast Area 90.4% Single-stream 68.9% Two Bin 61.9% Weekly Collection