My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2010-05-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2010
>
2010-05-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/24/2010 9:37:14 AM
Creation date
5/24/2010 9:24:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
5/25/2010
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
215
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Recycling Pilot Program Summary <br />"During" versus "Before." The single-stream routes yielded increased <br />percentages of paper compared to the same areas collected as dual-stream routes <br />in the "Before" period. <br />"During" versus "Before." The single-stream routes generated decreased <br />percentages of metals, glass and plastics compared to the same areas collected as <br />dual-stream routes in the "Before" period. <br />Dual-Stream <br />"During" versus "Before." The composition of materials collected in the <br />combined "During" dual-stream pilot areas was not significantly different from <br />the composition compared to the same areas in the "Before" period. <br />"During" versus "During." The composition of materials collected in each of the <br />"During" dual-stream pilot areas (Weekly, Two Bins, Education) were not <br />statistically different from each other. <br />Non-Targeted Materials <br />The percentages of non-targeted materials (at the curb) in the single-stream routes <br />were higher than the percentages of non-targeted materials found on the same <br />routes collected as dual-stream routes in the "Before" period. <br />"During" versus "During." The percentages of non-targeted materials in the <br />single-stream routes were higher than the percentages of non-targeted materials <br />found in the combined "During" dual-stream pilot routes. <br />The overall results from the analysis reflect that the composition of materials collected <br />for recycling changed significantly with single-stream but did not change significantly <br />with any of the dual-stream variations (increased frequency, increased capacity, <br />increased education). <br />Tonnages of aterial Collected and Processed for Recovery <br />The overall goal of this pilot program was to help the City refine its curbside recycling <br />program to capture more recyclable material. Thus, this section includes an analysis <br />of how much additional material was recovered in each of the tested pilot approaches. <br />As discussed in the Pilot Design and Methodology section, a key issue is how to <br />address material that is collected at the curb but is not ultimately recovered and <br />recycled. Such contamination or residuals falls into three categories: <br />Non-targeted materials, collected at the curb; <br />Processing residuals from the MRF; and <br />Contaminants in marketed product (e.g., in bales sold to end-markets). <br />Comparison of Tonnages Collected During Pilot Collection Routes <br />The first step in comparing the tonnages was to develop average gross weights (all <br />tonnages, including non-targeted materials) collected per route for each week of the <br />s 16os DRAFT g <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.