Laserfiche WebLink
Appendix A <br />Test, dated October 18, 2003, was provided to the Project Team by WM. (See <br />Attachment A -2 for a more detailed discussion and analysis of this WM study.) <br />The report provides summary information resulting from the sorting and analyses <br />performed by WM at their Twin Cities MRF. The purpose for the test was to <br />determine the resulting material constituents resulting from single -sort recycling <br />collection and processing. WM reported that the resulting "Residue Fraction of <br />Processed Materials" from this test was 5.95 percent. WM stated that unrecoverable <br />materials were defined as materials not targeted for recycling at the Twin Cities MRF. <br />The WM report provided a separate breakdown of products and process residue from <br />both the "single- stream process system" (i.e., paper recovery line) and the "container <br />process system" (i.e., container recovery line). The first paper ( "single- stream ") line <br />produced about two percent residue of total input. The second, container line <br />produced about four percent residue of total input. Color- mixed, broken glass was not <br />considered residue by the study and represented 11 percent of the total input. Color - <br />sorted glass, in contrast, represented two percent of total input. <br />The residue estimate of 5.95 percent of total input is reasonable if the mixed - color, <br />broken glass is assumed to be a marketed, recycled commodity. If not, the total <br />residue, including such mixed -color glass, is about 17 percent. The other constituents <br />of the residue make up a minor fraction (e.g., film plastic such as bags, fluff, fines, <br />grit, other trash, and floor sweepings). Therefore, one of the key, remaining questions <br />not answered by the WM report is how much more does mixed - color, broken glass <br />increase within the single- stream process system at the WM Minneapolis MRF as <br />compared to glass from two stream collections processed directly into the container <br />process system at the MRF. Without a comparable two -sort test and analysis, it is not <br />possible for the Project Team to estimate. <br />Other Available Data <br />Several other studies and municipal recycling contracts are relevant to this analysis of <br />processing residuals. <br />Eureka Recycling (Minneapolis, MN), under its former structure within the Saint <br />Paul Neighborhood Energy Consortium, published an extensive study of a similar <br />pilot collection study as conducted in 2001. Six different collection pilot routes were <br />established similar to the Roseville pilot study design. (For more details, see Eureka <br />Recycling's web page: www.EurekaRecycline.ore.) <br />The Eureka study analyzed their pilot results for many of the same variables, <br />including: <br />■ Percent increase in tons recycled; <br />• City -wide materials that could be collected (as projected by pilot results); <br />• Percent material loss during processing; <br />• Net program material recycled; and <br />• Net overall percent increase in tons recycled. <br />A -4 B1605 <br />