Interstate Waste Services’ new facility has an annual capacity of 215,000 tons, the company said. | Courtesy of Machinex
Two U.S. MRFs have been on opposite ends of good and bad fortune this month, with a new $30 million facility opening in North Arlington, New Jersey, two days after a 23-year-old MRF was destroyed by a tornado in Columbia, Missouri. Continue Reading
Organizations across the U.S. have been working to grow reuse programs to the scale of cities and beyond. | Courtesy of Petaluma Reusable Cup Project
This article appeared in the April 2025 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
Systems for collecting, sanitizing and redistributing foodservice items are ready to scale up with the help of curbside collection, certain policy changes and other factors, panelists said at the Resource Recycling Conference late last year.
“The next chapter of reuse needs to be tested at city-scale to create an immersive and convenient experience, so that it can be widely adopted,” said Andy Rose, head of circular systems modeling at Perpetual, a nonprofit that works with communities to design and implement reuse systems.
Such a program could feature a common set of reusable items that’s disbursed through a variety of businesses, checked out like a library book or with a deposit, then finally collected back through bins around town, he said.
Rose and other program leaders described progress from coast to coast, including a reusable foodware program at Grand Canyon National Park, a plastic cup reuse pilot in Petaluma, California, and a glass container study in Durham, North Carolina.
Macy Zander, local reuse manager for another national nonprofit called Upstream, pointed to the significant share of resources — almost half of new glass and plastic, for example — that goes into hundreds of billions of single-use items every year in this country.
“Though recycling is clearly a very critical piece of the solution to effective waste management, we believe that there needs to be a shift in focus upstream to cut waste before it is even put out into the world,” she said. “The majority of these items are used by consumers for mere minutes or sometimes seconds before they get discarded.”
She added: “There’s a brighter side to this, though, and that is reuse.”
In many ways, the push offers a return to tradition while also cultivating local economic development and benefiting public health, the panelists said. And the field is wide open for someone to take the lead.
“Some people would argue with me, but I would say there is really no example of a reuse system deployed at scale globally, with the possible exception of beverage reuse in Germany,” said Elizabeth Balkan, director of Reloop North America, which takes American officials on tours of European systems that, as with recycling, often outshine those in the U.S.
“We gotta get to work, right? Because we’re behind,” Balkan said. “And there’s a lot of great lessons learned that we can also capture, so that we don’t have to reinvent the wheel.”
A program much like the one Rose described played out over three months last fall in Petaluma, a medium-sized town about an hour north of San Francisco.
The regional government agency Zero Waste Sonoma partnered with Closed Loop Partners’ NextGen Consortium, a brand-supported initiative to address single-use foodservice packaging, to create an open-loop cup reuse system, meaning it wasn’t restricted to one business or event.
Instead, 30 restaurants, including chains and mom-and-pops, shared a purple polypropylene cup that residents could drop off at more than 60 matching purple bins around town. It went further, with a paid public awareness campaign, the participation of a local MRF to pick up misplaced cups and an Uber Eats-style pickup service — “all the bells and whistles,” Zero Waste Sonoma Director Leslie Lukacs said.
“This is the first of its kind in our nation to do an equitable program because there is no deposit; everybody is just getting the reusable cup, and that’s it,” she said.
In the end, roughly 220,000 cups, or more than half, were returned, enough to provide environmental benefits compared to single-use cups, according to the final Closed Loop report released in February. On top of that, at least 80% of local residents knew about the program, understood how to participate and wanted it to continue.
“This data is not just going to help our community, it’s going to help everybody in the reuse space,” Lukacs said. “It’s been a highlight of my career to have this happen in my own backyard.”
The city of Seattle has taken a similarly wide-ranging approach to its own reuse program, said McKenna Morrigan, strategic adviser for Seattle Public Utilities. The Reuse Seattle initiative aims to support a reuse ecosystem by contracting for dishwashing and other services, recruiting participating businesses and paying for pilot projects and public communications.
“We know that we are not going to be able to make the progress that we want to see around reuse on our own, you know, as a city. We need everybody’s help to make progress,” Morrigan said. “We really see our role as creating the conditions for reuse solutions to flourish.”
The effort has partly come down to policy, she noted. Before 2022, Washington’s food code only allowed bring-your-own-cup programs for coffee shops and the like under certain conditions, involving paperwork and separate approvals.
“That’s a hard no” for busy small business owners, Morrigan said. “It’s pretty simple, but it turns out that’s actually a policy impediment in most states in the country to this day.”
An unsurprising ingredient in the reuse formula is the money, Morrigan added. The state and local economic development department provided some funding for Seattle’s work, and the city was on the hunt for more.
“A few weeks ago I was feeling pretty excited about where the EPA was going with their SWIFR dollars,” Morrigan said at the November conference, referring to the general election a few days prior and to the federal Solid Waste Infrastructure for Recycling grant program. “I don’t, unfortunately, think that the federal government is going to be a source of significant funding for any of our work in the near term the way we hoped it might be.”
Her words proved prophetic, as the Trump administration immediately halted billions of dollars of federal spending, including for SWIFR grants, to ensure they all aligned with the president’s priorities. The money had been approved by Congress, and federal law and U.S. Supreme Court precedent previously prevented such an appropriation hold-up. Several courts have since ordered the resumption of much of the funding, but some EPA grant recipients have told Resource Recycling the money is still locked or uncertain in recent weeks.
Zero Waste Sonoma applied for SWIFR’s second round in the fall to continue and expand the cup reuse program, Lukacs said in March. She had little hope of receiving it.
“I’m not quite sure if the SWIFR grant still exists,” she said, adding all of the cups and bins are in storage for the time being. “We’re just kind of pausing until maybe spring to see what happens.”
Whatever funding mechanisms are available, Lukacs reiterated her view that reuse programs must be a shared expense. Local or federal government funding is “part of the solution, but it’s not the full solution,” she told conference attendees.
Petaluma and Seattle’s examples illustrate the need for broad, systemic, infrastructural changes to allow reuse to reach its full potential, said Crystal Dreisbach, Upstream’s CEO. She pointed to polystyrene containers and trays, which have raised health concerns over contact with hot food and can be replaced with reusable alternatives yet are common in restaurants and schools. Why do we still use those?
“The answer is not because people are dumb or that’s all there is,” she said. “Really we haven’t created a system yet to make anything else possible.”
Interoperable, shareable infrastructure is essential — “It’s washing dishes, it’s transporting dishes, it’s storing dishes,” as Dreisbach put it. Businesses have been reusing pallets, crates and other back-of-house equipment for decades, she added, “and that type of reuse saves corporations an incredible amount of money.”
Upstream, Perpetual, Reloop, a fourth nonprofit called PR3 and many other groups are united in the quest to bring the same norms to customer-facing wares, Dreisbach said.
In her previous work in Durham, North Carolina, for instance, she worked with a network of partners, including a local MRF, to test out curbside collection and reuse for glass containers, the kinds used by distilleries, salsa makers and any number of other local businesses.
“They said the cost of the glass to put their stuff in was more costly to them than making the actual product,” Dreisbach said. And MRFs could benefit from joining reuse programs as well, with revenue streams that aren’t dependent on volatile commodity prices: “They can do what they do best — collect, transport, sort, redistribute — in a whole different way.”
More recently, Upstream last year received a grant from the National Park Foundation to lead a 2.5-year reuse program in Grand Canyon National Park that might be replicated in other national parks. And the Chicago Bears launched a reusable cup program at its stadium in November, which could provide an anchor venue that makes washing infrastructure accessible to schools, hospitals and other establishments, Dreisbach said. Moves like these bring reuse closer to becoming an everyday utility, much as it was decades and centuries ago.
“We’re renormalizing reuse, aren’t we?” she said, adding she prefers the word recirculation. “It creates a visual concept.”
Multiple states and other communities are working to bring an extended producer responsibility framework to solar and wind. | bombermoon/Shutterstock
This article appeared in the April 2025 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
As extended producer responsibility continues expanding in fits and starts around the U.S. — for carpet and paint here, batteries and packaging there — the implements of renewable energy are emerging as another EPR frontier.
Washington is the only state with a solar panel EPR policy in place, according to the Product Stewardship Institute, but similar bills have been proposed this year in Connecticut, New York, and Georgia, and New York’s Niagara County has had its own scaled-down version since 2022. A proposal covering wind turbine blades has been introduced in Illinois, and another for both solar and wind is up for consideration in Minnesota.
EPR policies in general require the manufacturers of certain goods to contribute money and other resources toward programs that collect and recycle those items, often in increasing proportions over time.
“The reason I brought this bill, when a lot was happening with green energy, was because I knew there needed to be a plan for the end of life for this stuff,” said Minnesota State Rep. Peggy Scott (R-Andover), adding she wants to avoid a repeat of a $22 million hazardous waste cleanup in her district several years ago. “These blades are huge. And I knew there were some pretty powerful chemicals involved.”
The original language of Scott’s bill would have mandated producers of these renewable energy systems to implement a product stewardship program for the collection and recycling of discarded materials and prohibited the sale of such products in the state unless producers were part of a stewardship plan approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
Progress on the renewables EPR front has been bumpy and uneven, however. Shortly after Scott’s bill was introduced, she enacted a delete-all amendment, which stripped out everything except a moratorium on disposing of wind and solar infrastructure in landfills, pointing to a recent report from the MPCA on the topic that she and other state officials are reviewing.
“In talking to the MPCA, they were supportive of the plan and thought it was an important first step, but they needed more time to figure out if this needed to be done with legislation or more administratively,” Scott added. “I think more will happen in the future. People want this to be addressed, and I told the MPCA I want to continue to work with them on this.”
And while Washington’s law was approved in 2017, the state has yet to enforce it, said Dave Bennett, communications manager for the solid waste management program run by the state’s Department of Ecology.
The Photovoltaic Module Stewardship and Takeback Program requires solar panel manufacturers to provide a convenient, environmentally sound recycling system for panels bought after the law’s passage. It also requires manufacturers of panels sold in the state to have a state-approved stewardship in plan as of July 1, 2025. Noncompliance carries a fine of up to $10,000 per panel sale.
“Many solar panel manufacturers missed the July 2024 deadline to submit a stewardship plan,” Bennett said. “While (the Department of) Ecology is working to bring manufacturers into compliance, we believe the majority will continue to disregard the law or decide to stop selling panels into Washington.”
Solar panels and wind turbine blades contain valuable metals and highly refined semiconductor materials that can be recovered and used in new products. But both are currently difficult to recycle through existing methods due to their durability and composite construction. More than two-thirds of panels meet the legal definition of hazardous waste under the EPA, according to Scott’s office.
“One of the most pressing concerns with improper solar panel disposal is the presence of hazardous metals, including lead, cadmium and selenium,” said Brett C. Henderson, CEO and co-founder of Solar Panel Recycling, which has facilities in North Carolina, Georgia and Texas.
“Solar panels are designed to be durable and well-encapsulated, making them safe while in use on rooftops or in the field,” Henderson said. “However, when a panel’s protective encapsulation is compromised — whether through improper landfill disposal or incomplete recycling practices — the risks increase significantly.”
Beyond environmental pollution, the landfill disposal of solar panels is a growing concern due to capacity constraints as more and more panels reach their end of life, he added.
New York’s Niagara County became the first local government in the U.S. to pass an extended producer responsibility law relating to solar panels. As of Aug. 1, 2022, Local Law No. 4 requires all manufacturers of solar panels to finance the takeback and recycling of photovoltaic modules.
The county was home to several environmental mishaps, most notably the Love Canal toxic chemical dump that was discovered leaking in Niagara Falls in the 1970s. That “unsettling environmental legacy,” along with the state’s growing solar energy presence, prompted action, said Dawn Timm, director of the county’s Division of Environmental and Solid Waste. New York is ninth in cumulative solar production in the nation, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association.
“The (county) Legislature made an effort to preserve the long-term environmental legacy of the community amid the proliferation of solar development,” Timm said. “We’re taking proactive steps now to prevent mismanagement in the future.”
Companies must come into compliance within 30 days of their first solar panel sale in the county by developing a stewardship plan to ensure panels are taken back safely and at no additional cost to residents. Plans must include:
The law charges companies $1,000 for an initial stewardship plan fee and then $250 per year afterward. Violations carry a penalty of up to $100 per module per day. The county can also seek injunctions against developers that continue projects without a plan.
The law was written in conjunction with the Product Stewardship Institute, a nonprofit that works to reduce the impact of consumer products on health and the environment.
“Solar panel recycling is a new frontier, and as the first generation of solar panels comes out of commission, this type of forward-thinking policy will be needed by other communities, counties and states,” said Scott Cassel, PSI’s CEO.
To date, the county has approved nine plans, Timm said — one manufacturer plan, for LG Electronics, and eight project-specific approvals.
“As the first in the nation to establish such a law, Niagara County has continuously responded to the curiosity of other states, governments and related organizations by providing insight and feedback about our experiences,” Timm said. “Early on, developers and installers were less than pleased. However, we have demonstrated a reasonable approach to implementation and feel we equally support development while preserving the integrity of our community.”
Henderson at Solar Panel Recycling said that while EPR has proven effective in electronics recycling, he has concerns about its practicality and overall effectiveness in the solar industry, and a straightforward landfill ban on solar panels would be more effective.
North Carolina has a ban on solar disposal in construction and demolition facilities that goes into effect this December, for example, and a broader landfill ban has been proposed in Illinois this session.
“This would naturally drive stakeholders — including manufacturers, asset owners, true solar recyclers and collectors — to develop the most efficient methods for collection and proper recycling,” he said. “An open-market approach would drive continuous research, development and innovation in solar recycling and collection, fostering the most efficient and cost-effective solutions without the constraints of EPR mandates.”
One of his concerns is the effectiveness of enforcing EPR policies on foreign solar manufacturers, who produce the vast majority of panels sold in the U.S., based on data from the U.S. International Trade Commission. He said the greatest improvements could come from innovating new applications for recovered materials, such as refining silicon into nanoparticles for various industrial applications.
A.J. Orben, co-founder of We Recycle Solar, a Yuma, Arizona-based company that handles recycling of solar panels and often advises on proposed state policy, noted that outside of Washington the cost of recycling is borne by the asset holder.
“It’s costly,” he said. “The economics don’t make sense. It costs more to break the panels down than the value of the recovered materials.”
Balancing that math is one of Washington’s struggles, Bennett said, along with limited recycling options in the Pacific Northwest and hazardous material concerns. A pair of bills before the state legislature in March would let the industry continue to operate legally in Washington while fixes are developed, delaying the effective date until at least 2028.
“Our legislative proposal will establish a facilitated advisory committee to identify concerns with the law and develop recommendations to overcome setbacks,” Bennett said.
“Modifying the law will make the solar takeback program stronger and remove barriers to increased deployment of solar in Washington, helping the state achieve clean energy goals.”
But not everyone agrees that more time is needed. The Energy Fair Trade Coalition, a nonprofit advocating for accountability in the energy sector, sent a letter to Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson in October calling for immediate enforcement of the law. Executive Director Bret Manley cited a potential recycling cost of up to $67.5 million for panels that have been sold in Washington since 2017, a cost companies aren’t on the hook for.
“This glaring oversight threatens consumers’ ability to responsibly recycle their solar panels,” he said in the letter. “Washington resources are precious, and ensuring a clean environment for future generations is paramount.”
It’s no coincidence Minnesota is considering turbine EPR, as the state and its neighbor to the south have been the site of several disputes over wind turbine disposal.
In September the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission extracted a pledge from wind power developer NextEra Energy to move dumped turbine blades after several years of complaints. Around the same time, the Iowa attorney general filed suit against Global Fiberglass Solutions, a blade-recycling venture based in Washington, over claims of improper blade disposal.
Wind turbine blades primarily consist of fiberglass, balsa wood and foam, along with other trace material that is held in shape using an epoxy resin. But blades have been notoriously difficult to recycle because of the epoxy resin that coats the fiberglass, said Jeff Woods, director of business development for Regen Fiber in Fairfax, Iowa.
The company recycles end-of-life wind turbine blades and virgin scrap material left over from wind blade manufacturing to create reinforcement fibers for industrial applications. Additionally, the company operates a facility in Des Moines that recycles scrap from new blades and maintains a blade processing plant in Lubbock, Texas. Its products can be used in concrete, asphalt and composite applications.
Regen’s recycling process is mechanical, with blades arriving at its facilities after shredding. Instead of trying to remove the resin, which can be a chemically and energetically intensive process, the company takes advantage of the epoxy’s positive benefits like alkali resistance and added strength and durability.
“We’re addressing a critical need in the wind industry by offering a truly sustainable recycling solution that diverts blades from landfills or being burned,” Woods said.
Through a hail of executive and court orders and related uncertainty over federal funding, Recycling Education and Outreach grant recipients worked to pick up where they left off. | Andrea Izzotti/Shutterstock
This article appeared in the March 2025 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
The 26 executive orders signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office unleashed weeks of missing funding and confusion for recycling programs across the country — problems that have yet to reach a clear conclusion.
Titled “Unleashing American Energy,” one executive order directed all agencies to “immediately pause the disbursement of funds” from the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, often called the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, to ensure that federal spending aligned with the Trump administration’s priorities.
The two laws had dedicated hundreds of millions of dollars to new recycling facilities and other initiatives, such as the U.S. EPA’s Recycling Education and Outreach program and its Solid Waste Infrastructure for Recycling, or SWIFR, grants.
Another order told federal officials to “coordinate the termination of all discriminatory programs, including illegal DEI and ‘diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility’ (DEIA) mandates, policies, programs, preferences, and activities in the Federal Government, under whatever name they appear.”
Though a huge variety of programs throughout the government have been affected, the Recycling Education and Outreach program, which emphasized environmental justice and reaching multicultural and underserved communities, sits at the crux of these two orders. Below is an account of the administration’s early moves through REO grantees’ perspectives.
The nonprofit Oregon Community Warehouse in Portland collects donated furniture and other home goods for formerly homeless families, refugees and others in need, which helped it secure a $1.6 million REO grant to spread awareness of its services, especially among the city’s multicultural communities, Communications Manager Phil Gerigscott said.
“As far as we know, we are still receiving funding and that won’t change,” he said, adding he had accessed some of the grant dollars as recently as Jan. 23. “We’re definitely a little nervous, but it seems like hopefully still smooth sailing.”
The organization has long relied solely on word-of-mouth, so the grant was meant for more staff members and contractors, updating the center’s website and developing culturally specific ads — after English, Portland’s most common languages include Spanish, Chinese, Ukrainian and Arabic, Gerigscott said.
The warehouse’s EPA contacts generally had been easy to reach, Gerigscott added. But he hadn’t heard more details about the order. The agency also didn’t return Resource Recycling’s request for comment at the time.
“We’re under the assumption that no news is good news,” Gerigscott said.
Near the end of the day, a new memo from the White House’s Office of Management and Budget vastly broadened the scope of multiple funding pauses like the “Unleashing American Energy” order.
“Each agency must complete a comprehensive analysis of all of their Federal financial assistance programs to identify programs, projects, and activities that may be implicated by any of the President’s executive orders,” wrote Matthew J. Vaeth, the OMB’s acting director.
“In the interim, to the extent permissible under applicable law, Federal agencies must temporarily pause (bolded in original) all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance, and other relevant agency activities that may be implicated by the executive orders, including, but not limited to, financial assistance for foreign aid, nongovernmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal.”
Uproar against the halted funding came swiftly, with the National Council of Nonprofits and others arguing in the U.S. District Court of Washington, D.C., that the administration didn’t have the authority to cancel Congress’s appropriations and was violating their constitutional freedoms of expression and assembly. In response, District Judge Loren L. AliKhan placed an administrative stay on the freeze lasting several days.
Meanwhile, the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission in Virginia, which had been awarded a $2 million REO grant for a “Start Smart, Recycle Right” outreach campaign, received an email that afternoon from its EPA contact.
“EPA is working diligently to implement President Trump’s Unleashing American Energy Executive Order issued on January 20 in coordination with the Office of Management and Budget,” the EPA wrote. “The agency has paused all funding actions related to the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act at this time.”
Gerigscott shared a similar message by text: “We just received official word that funds are halted until further notice.”
At a press conference, Trump Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated that the pause was temporary and said she had spoken with Trump’s then-unconfirmed nominee for OMB director, Russell Vought.
“He told me to tell all of you that the line to his office is open for other federal government agencies across the board, and if they feel that programs are necessary and in line with the president’s agenda, then the Office of Management and Budget will review those measures,” Leavitt said.
Lynn Onstot, spokesperson for the city of Joplin, Missouri, said the city’s REO project was still in its early stages of data-gathering, but its funding hadn’t been affected. Joplin was awarded $1.7 million for a multimedia advertising campaign with a particular focus on partnering with schools, reaching residents of disadvantaged census tracts and increasing participation in Joplin’s opt-in curbside program.
After the administrative stay, Vaeth at the OMB released a two-sentence memo rescinding his earlier one. On the social media site X, Leavitt noted that the early executive orders, including the ones affecting the infrastructure law, weren’t rescinded.
“This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze,” she wrote. “It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo. Why? To end any confusion created by the court’s injunction. The President’s EO’s on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”
Walking Mountains Science Center in Eagle County, Colorado, was on the cusp of starting in earnest its $570,000 project to train recycling advocates among local Spanish speakers, said Amelia Kovacs, the center’s sustainability programs manager.
“Our grant is very second-half heavy, with creating a drop site, actually tracking beginning and end diversion rates in those priority communities,” she said, and several people were recruited and hired.
The organization had put in a draw-down request for some of its funding the day before, but it hadn’t gone through yet, and the EPA had sent no clarification.
“We’ve been asking them many times, ‘so should we be worried?’” Kovacs said. “It’s clear as mud.”
The organization leans heavily on local and state funding and can carry on without the REO grant, she said. But she’ll likely have to sharply scale down the REO project, if it can continue at all, perhaps by reframing it to support the rollout of the state’s extended producer responsibility policy.
By this point, the administration had eliminated multiple programs protecting civil rights, cancelling the Biden administration’s environmental justice initiatives, suspending refugee aid and putting a freeze on the Justice Department’s civil rights enforcement after rescinding an executive order dating back to the Civil Rights Era that, in its present-day form, banned federal contractors from discriminating against employees because of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or national origin.
Trump and other officials have said diversity initiatives amount to reverse discrimination.
“In my personal eyes, I see this as a tactic to scare, and for people to kind of shift their eyes away from the good work that is happening in our community,” Kovacs said of the administration’s actions. She wasn’t discouraged from working to reach disadvantaged residents, she added.
“It’s even more reason why we should exist. It gives me more fire, I would say, to continue my work, because to me it feels more necessary than ever.”
In the U.S. District Court of Rhode Island, another lawsuit against the funding freezes brought by 22 states and D.C. led to a temporary restraining order against the administration, during which the judge said no funding could be frozen.
“Defendants shall also be restrained and prohibited from reissuing, adopting, implementing, or otherwise giving effect to the OMB Directive under any other name or title,” wrote Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr.
Back in Virginia, the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission received another message from an EPA official: “Funding has been paused for grants under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act at this time. This pause pertains to all funding on existing grants for the SWIFR and REO grant programs. The pause on these grants remains in place even though it has been lifted for other federal grant programs. We will provide more guidance as EPA’s Office of Grants and Debarment makes it available to our program.”
Judge AliKhan in D.C. granted a similar temporary restraining order, drawing on two centuries of legal tradition to find that the freezes implicated issues of nationwide importance.
“Defendants’ actions appear to suffer from infirmities of a constitutional magnitude,” AliKhan wrote. “The appropriation of the government’s resources is reserved for Congress, not the Executive Branch. And a wealth of legal authority supports this fundamental separation of powers.”
Amid the back and forth, the Ciudad Soil and Water Conservation District in New Mexico slowed but didn’t halt its work on a $590,000 grant for collaborating with local schools and other partners in low-income and disadvantaged areas, District Manager Joshua O’Halloran said. It seemed like the EPA was loosening up with the money, so he told staff to work on it on an as-needed basis.
A year into the project, people have been hired and food-scrap composting programs have rolled out at a big middle school and a senior center.
“It’s kind of delayed us and caused a lot of conversations with partners,” O’Halloran said. “We have the risk of losing trust with them, and that was a bigger deal than anything.”
The whiplash from the last administration’s requirements to the current one’s has been confusing and difficult to navigate, he added. The organization’s $3.8 million yearly budget is 98% grant-funded, meaning that there’s no backup money and the REO project can’t continue without its grant. But “regardless of what an administration or the EPA says, we’re going to stick to what’s true for us,” he said.
“Working with all of those people as our constituents is what’s important to us,” O’Halloran added. “We’re not going to change who we are because somebody in Washington tells us that’s what’s important to them.”
The Chicago-area Metropolitan Mayors Caucus’s last word from the EPA was to pause its $2 million REO grant, said Edith Makra, director of environmental initiatives.
“We were going great guns; in fact, I was supposed to have new staff, my new recycling education and outreach coordinator, starting last Wednesday,” she said. But she couldn’t make a commitment to a new hire.
“We are very, very angry about this,” Makra said. “It’s a kick in the gut to the work that we’re doing across the board.”
Other federal agencies with grants to the caucus have resumed those grants, she added. If EPA’s didn’t, the group wouldn’t have the resources to continue its advertising campaign.
“It’s paused, so I can’t speculate on what that means. It’s not rescinded, and they’re not trying to do a clawback,” Makra said. “But this grant is underway; we’re doing the work, and I never ever would have expected this to happen.”
Back in the Rhode Island District Court, the judge found federal agencies had been disobeying his previous order and keeping funds frozen, ordering them immediately to comply.
Kerrin O’Brien, executive director of the Michigan Recycling Coalition, said her organization had no trouble accessing its REO grant and had gone ahead and hired two people to meet the grant’s obligation, despite the EPA’s message to pause work.
“We’re bearing that risk right now and committed to our people,” she said.
O’Brien saw the program as vulnerable to the administration’s rejection because of its environmental justice goals, she said, but the work is nonetheless worthwhile.
“Whatever we call it — Justice40, DEI, whatever — there is still demonstrated need throughout Michigan — rural, urban, subrural, suburban — to help people understand how recycling works, how they can participate correctly,” she said. “All of these systems and programs aim to make our economy more productive, aim to make our natural resources work more for us. All Michigan residents really need to know how to participate in effective ways.”
Bob Crum, executive director of the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, shared similar sentiments.
“This is critical, critical money for us,” he said. “This money was really going to be some important outreach.”
Hampton Roads received this message from the EPA: “Thank you for your patience. At this point, we can move forward to resume all grant activities with our existing REO grantees, and work to ensure that these grant funds are spent appropriately.”
O’Halloran at the Ciudad Soil and Water Conservation District in New Mexico said he received a similar message. Could the organization pick up where it left off? “That’s what we’re hoping,” he said.
Makra said she still hadn’t gotten word of an end to the pause.
“That would be music to my ears,” she said. “You give me hope, though.”
In an email, EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou said: “EPA worked expeditiously to enable payment accounts for IIJA and IRA grant recipients, so funding is now accessible to all recipients.”
Potential acquisitions among the biggest steel producers would likely have a muted impact on local recycling. | Rito Succeed/Shutterstock
This article appeared in the March 2025 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
The potential merger of U.S. Steel, one of the country’s largest users of recycled metal, with other major steel companies could change the industry’s global landscape. But when it comes to immediate impact on local scrappers and municipal collection programs, mergers and acquisitions generally take a back seat to cold fronts and seasonal thaws, several stakeholders said in recent interviews.
“We’ve had a winter that’s been rougher than we’ve had in the past few years,” said Brad Cook, general manager of the Premier Metals scrapping company in Rochester, New York. “That’s slowed the retail trade down in 2025. Come spring, we’re preparing ourselves to clean the corners and get things going.”
Beyond nature, the extent of any future industry change could depend on how well a given company goes green — and not the green usually associated with recycling.
“Does one company’s relative position put the combined company into a stronger position? Companies in this spot would look at long-term sustainability with a sound economic premise,” said Michael E. Hoffman, CEO of the National Waste & Recycling Association. “A combination of companies could make (incorporating recycled steel) go a little faster.”
What hasn’t been fast is U.S. Steel’s acquisition process, which was subject to federal approval of foreign investments and has therefore moved at a glacial pace, allowing other players to join the game.
The proposed $15 billion acquisition of U.S. Steel by Japanese company Nippon Steel has faced a lot of scrutiny since it was announced in December 2023. The deal has rare bipartisan opposition; then-President Joe Biden blocked the deal in January, citing national security risks of a foreign owner, while successor President Donald Trump has also continued to oppose the deal after taking office.
After meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, Trump said in early February that Nippon Steel will shift to investment rather than a takeover. But that plan could fall to the wayside if Cleveland-
Cliffs can buy U.S. Steel, which Cleveland-Cliffs CEO Lourenco Gonclaves told CNBC in January he wants to do in partnership with Nucor Corp.
The companies represent four of the top 25 steel producers in the world, according to numbers from the World Steel Association: Nippon Steel is fourth, Nucor 15th, Cleveland-Cliffs 22nd and U.S. Steel 24th.
Requests for comment from all four companies went unanswered, but industry experts say recycling is a key component of domestic production.
“Steel producers in the United States recycle significant amounts of steel scrap in their production processes,” said Kevin Dempsey, president and CEO of the American Iron and Steel Institute. “Large steel companies clearly have a significant impact on the consumption of steel scrap, and logically then they also have an impact on recycling efforts.”
The companies made an impact on the recycling industry long before any merger talks surfaced. Nippon Steel was one of 15 founding members of the Japan Used Can Treatment Association in 1973. The group was renamed the Japan Steel Can Recycling Association in 2001, advocates for greater steel recycling and hosts and holds educational events in schools.
U.S. Steel has, in the words of CEO David Burritt, woven sustainability into its way of conducting business. In 2021, U.S. Steel acquired Big River Steel in part to bolster its sustainability initiatives. The Osceola, Arkansas, facility earned the ResponsibleSteel Certified Steel designation in fall 2024 thanks in part to a recycled metals use rate of around 90%. Overall, the company in 2023 recycled more than 5.2 million tons of purchased and produced steel scrap while producing 22.4 million tons of raw steel, according to the U.S. Steel 2023 sustainability report.
Cleveland-Cliffs, meanwhile, recycled 6.6 million tons of steel scrap and recovered iron materials, according to its 2023 sustainability report. Nucor eclipses both, recycling 20 million tons of steel annually.
Each company has made individual recycling- and sustainability-related commitments. Those initiatives would presumably continue under combined corporate umbrellas, but what impact that has on steel prices or other aspects of the recycling system remains unclear.
An analysis of recent mergers fails to yield substantive answers, thanks in large part to their timing. Cleveland-Cliffs acquired AK Steel in 2020, right around the time the COVID-19 pandemic began; the pandemic caused iron and steel scrap prices to fall 17.4%, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, to $354 per ton.
The Tata Steel/Thyssenkrupp Steel merger in Europe and ArcelorMittal/Essar Steel deal in India happened in 2021, when mid-pandemic supply shortages caused scrap prices to soar from $536.10 per ton in December 2020 to $739.12 months later.
Overall, scrap supply has remained relatively consistent historically, according to Brian Raff, vice president for sustainability and government relations at the American Institute of Steel Construction. The only potential impact could come if something drastic like the shutdown of a company or major mill were to happen.
“A fabricator really doesn’t care” what’s happening at the major companies, he said. “They’re buying steel to meet project requirements. If there’s more capacity (resulting from a merger), if there’s more steel, that’s great.”
Recycling rates likewise show no major movement based on mergers. Data from the American Iron and Steel Institute shows the North American steel recycling rate to be about 69%; it has remained above 60% since 1970.
That consistency comes with the industry’s maturity. The recycling infrastructure in the United States is more sophisticated than that of steel-producing nations like India and China, Dempsey said. Many of the nation’s nearly 18,000 scrap and recycling facilities have been in business for decades, and the National Materials Council estimates there are more than 24,000 municipal recycling programs operating in the U.S.
Source: U.S. EPA
Municipal recycling programs collected 6.36 million tons of steel and other ferrous metals in 2018, according to the U.S. EPA. Cans collected at the curb, for example, are sent to scrap processors, who crush and bundle them before selling to steel-producing companies, Dempsey said.
But curbside activity makes up less than 1% of the steel scrap used by U.S. steel producers, Dempsey said.
Most of the recycled material steel producers use comes from two places.
Recycling processors buy old cars, construction leftovers, broken appliances and other scrap steel, then cut or bale the metal to sell to steel mills.
Prompt scrap — metal that never reached the marketplace, such as leftovers from automobile component manufacturing — is collected by steel companies for reuse.
Mills melt the scrap down at nearly 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Impurities rise to the surface and are skimmed off. The molten metal is shaped and solidified before it’s transported to factories. A recycled item can take its new form in as little as two months.
The cycle never has to end due to steel’s inherent reusability without degradation; the production process allows impurities to be removed. Even those impurities, collectively known as steel slag, are recycled into asphalt and other materials. The Can Corporation of America estimates about 75% of all steel ever produced is still in use in some fashion.
“Most steel scrap can be recycled into virtually any new steel product, so a steel can or deconstructed steel beam can become a new steel beam, or a car door, refrigerator or steel container,” Dempsey said.
Finding scrap steel came more into focus as mills shifted to electric arc furnace technology in the 1970s and 1980s — around the time steel recycling rates began a decades-long climb from around 150,000 tons in 1970 to more than 2 million in 1990, according to U.S. EPA data. These furnaces use electricity to heat material and are fed recycled steel. Traditional blast furnaces need iron ore and coal-based fuel to operate.
Eliminating the need for mined materials, combined with the decreased emissions resulting from production, makes EAF production more sustainable, Hoffman said. Nearly 71% of U.S. steel production happens via EAF.
“The decision to go to electric arc furnace was economic,” he said. “If we were going to produce steel domestically, we had to move to a production method that was more economical.”
All new steel could be made from recycled steel, but scrap scarcity prevents that on a global level, according to the World Steel Association. The average lifespan for a steel product is 40 years, which the organization said prevents a continuous flow of enough product to meet demand.
Dempsey noted the U.S. produces enough ferrous scrap to export about nearly 18 million tons of scrap per year. Hoffman said the country’s long-standing automotive industry has created a generational scrap flow that helps give domestic recycling a leg up on the rest of the world.
There may not be enough scrap to meet producers’ demand, but Cook said the supply domestically always seems to be there — “I’ve been in the business for more than 25 years, and I’ve never seen it stop.”
So any movement by U.S. Steel or other parties may not mean much in the grand recycling scheme. Rather, Dempsey said, companies that can sort scrap more accurately by contaminant level have the advantage, because “the recycling of incoming scrap steel can best be matched to the new steel product’s end use.”
Imports could also have an impact. Whoever owns the major domestic steel companies, they could see an uptick for demand if proposed tariffs on foreign products take effect. That could drive up scrap prices, but since U.S. mills run at about 75% capacity, there’s room to meet a potential demand surge, Raff said.
Dollars are the most important factor, Hoffman said: The bottom line will trump any short-term political motivations when it comes to recycling.
“I would make the case, if you look out 10 years, more metals will be made with recycling, with a green emphasis,” he said. “If you want true, long-term environmentally sound outcomes, they have to stand on the back of a sound economic model.”
Courtesy of Nopetro
This article appeared in the February 2025 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
Did you know that the U.S. produces 268 million tons of trash each year, most of which finds its way to landfills? But landfills are not just storage sites for waste, they are also the third-largest source of human-related methane emissions in the country, according to the U.S. EPA.
Waste naturally produces methane as it decomposes, and when released into the atmosphere, it contributes to global warming. Yet methane is also the primary component of natural gas. Today waste is being given a second life in the form of harnessing landfill gas for renewable energy production.
For an industry rooted in sustainability, adopting renewable natural gas aligns perfectly with the recycling industry’s mission. RNG is a cheaper, clean, proven U.S.-made energy source that also happens to be renewable. The recycling industry can lead by example through converting its fleets to run on RNG.
RNG is the result of a process that captures methane emissions at landfills and converts them into a renewable fuel. This waste-to-fuel process begins by capturing methane at landfills, purifying it and converting it to a clean-burning fuel. Once purified, RNG is interchangeable with traditional natural gas, making it easy to integrate into the existing natural gas pipeline infrastructure for use as compressed natural gas fuel for vehicles.
The RNG industry has seen significant growth in recent years, experiencing a 13% year-over-year increase in 2023. With the recycling truck market estimated to grow over 6% between 2024 and 2032, there is an even greater need for alternative fuel solutions like RNG.
Converting your fleet to CNG can lead to significant cost savings, particularly as volatile diesel prices continue to fluctuate. The cost of natural gas remains relatively stable and a substantially cheaper option compared to diesel. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, between April 1 and April 15, 2023, the national average price of diesel fuel in the U.S. was $4.25 per gallon while the national average price of CNG in that same timeframe was $2.99 per diesel-gallon-equivalent.
Today all major original equipment manufacturers are manufacturing natural gas trucks on the assembly lines, which ensures that fleets can transition to RNG-sourced CNG vehicles without compromising performance. These trucks offer the same torque, horsepower and range as their diesel counterparts. In fact, Cummins’ X15N natural gas engine is already being tested by major fleets and has been praised for its durability and diesel-like performance.
By making the switch, heavy transportation, such as recycling trucks, and power generation greenhouse gas emissions can
also be reduced by 95%, according to Argonne National Laboratory. RNG also plays a key role in a circular economy model, turning waste into a usable product. For the recycling industry, this means using fuel produced from the city’s waste to power its fleets, creating a closed-loop system that benefits both the environment and the economy.
Powering your fleet with RNG or CNG derived from the city’s waste is a win-win scenario. The recycling industry benefits greatly from this transition, as it aligns perfectly with its principles of waste reduction and resource efficiency.
Now is the time to act. By choosing RNG, the recycling industry can make meaningful strides toward a cleaner planet while maintaining the operational efficiency necessary to meet our waste management needs.
Jorge Herrera is CEO of Nopetro Energy. Since its founding, he has led the company’s rapid growth into a vertically integrated clean energy leader focused on global decarbonization through production and distribution of compressed natural gas, renewable natural gas and liquefied natural gas.
The views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not imply endorsement by Resource Recycling, Inc. If you have a subject you wish to cover in an op-ed, please send a short proposal to [email protected] for consideration.
Businesses and other organizations across the country provide examples of collecting unusual and uncommonly recycled materials. | Courtesy of Binghampton Development Corporation
This article appeared in the February 2025 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
Finding a niche and keeping materials separated and clean are crucial to building recycling programs that go beyond the everyday commodities, leaders of programs that collect items as diverse as Solo cups, streetlights, swimming pool lane dividers and plastic drums for soft drink flavorings said.
“We’re able to get top dollar because we’re sorting it all very specifically,” said Andy Kizzee, director of the nonprofit Binghampton Development Corporation in Memphis, Tennessee, which for the past three years has been one of perhaps only two groups in the U.S. that dismantle old streetlights to recover individual components made of copper, aluminum, glass and other materials.
The organization has processed more than 78,000 lights from projects replacing sodium fixtures with LEDs in Memphis, Nashville and other cities, Kizzee said. Each light contains around $7 or $8 worth of parts that in the standard scrap metal trade would typically be shredded and divvied up among a long chain of scrappers, haulers and exporters, he added: “We’re able to unlock all of that value in one spot by manually disassembling it.”
And while any recycling operation needs to collect enough volume to make shipments economical, even an organization of modest size can get in on the uncommon and unusual side of recycling.
“This MRF being as tiny as it is has advantages,” said Nick Kluge, assistant director of waste recovery services for the University of Minnesota’s Twin Cities campus, where staff and volunteers accommodate impromptu collections from every sort of research and student activity. He recalled the agricultural side of campus asking him about the possibility of recycling the plastic tags used in plant nurseries, for example.
“So we set up another gaylord” and started collecting, Kluge said. “Sure enough, once a year we send out six, eight hundred pounds of these things” to a buyer.
Laurel Harrop was 23 when she became a recycling entrepreneur in 2011, launching Laurel Environmental Group to recycle lighting fixtures, working her way up from interior lighting to streetlights. An old family friend and blacksmith from Wisconsin provided the key, fabricating hydraulic presses for her that could pop out a streetlight’s insides.
“We came up with a process and a system,” she said in an interview, and before long her company was the go-to streetlight recycler for major cities throughout the U.S. A San Diego project processing 35,000 fixtures was her breakout. Hundreds of thousands more have followed; the company is now in the process of doing 130,000 lights for Philadelphia.
“This business is one of those that people just don’t know is even going on,” Harrop said, adding she’s not aware of any others in the field besides BDC, the Memphis nonprofit. “I always enjoyed that we were doing something good here.”
The BDC following her example happened almost by accident, Kizzee said. The organization focuses on building workplace skills and experience for people who need the help, such as those with histories of substance abuse or with the criminal justice system. A few years ago the nonprofit partnered with an energy services company that was involved with streetlight conversions in the region and was interested in using BDC’s warehouse space.
BDC had already begun working on recycling tires, polystyrene and mattresses, as reported in this magazine and in the November 2024 issue, “Expanding the tire recycling front.” So Kizzee spent a few weeks prying apart a few dozen fixtures and developing a concept for a new recycling stream.
That led to processing fixtures for Memphis’ conversion project in 2023 and now Nashville’s own ongoing project, which is nearly zero-waste after BDC connected with a nearby glass recycling company, Kizzee said.
“A trailer of about 1,300 fixtures gets filled up over two weeks, and then it drives here,” he said.
Harrop said the work’s been so successful that the jobs are starting to slow down in California and elsewhere. She compared it to the phasing out of CRT televisions — there are only so many out there.
“I used to think I’d find another niche in recycling like that,” Harrop said, though she’s been increasingly focused on another company she started that sells canned beverages. “But you never know. I want to keep doing this until it’s done.”
Courtesy of University of Minnesota Waste Recovery Services
Wil Ross, executive vice president of sales and procurement at Alternative Plastics in northwest Arkansas, has made a career of finding, processing and selling an esoteric assortment of olefin plastics.
Toilet seats and other fixtures, barrels that held food and drink flavors, totes and pallets from the area’s poultry industry, bread crates from bakeries, car bumpers and dashboards, retail and yard signs, plastic shotgun shell casings — all of these things and more have come through his facility for pelletization and resale to manufacturers.
“I do a lot of cold calling,” said Ross, who makes a point of visiting the industrial parks within a few hundred miles to make connections and learn about manufacturers, the recycled resin they might need and what they do with their waste, such as excess trimmings or defective products. Alternative Plastics takes care to keep shipments and plastic types separate at all times for purity and quality control, Ross added, because buyers are picky.
“Plastics is so diverse. Paper’s paper, you can’t really change paper. But plastics is just ridiculous,” he said. “We know what everything is prior to it coming in, so when we run it, we run that thing and that thing only. It makes it a hell of a lot easier.”
Kluge applies the same meticulous separation to the University of Minnesota’s waste recovery department, allowing it to resell soundproofing panels from music rooms for reuse, for instance, and to recycle plastic pipettes from chemistry labs, which go to nearby manufacturer Avon Plastics for landscaping items. Solo cups, swim lane dividers, interior lighting fixtures, plastic carriers for aluminum cans, and CDs and their cases are collected, too.
Souvenir cups from the athletics department might have presented a challenge because of their label wrapping, but “if you keep them segregated as their own type, just souvenir cups, then they can be recycled again,” Kluge said.
He partly credited the university’s in-house control of its material streams for the programs’ success. The university has its own fleet of trucks, small MRF and a reuse warehouse.
“Those three together make us extremely unique,” Kluge said. “You gain control of the materials from the loading dock to as far as you want to take it.”
And while the campus has achieved a diversion rate of around 55%, he said, it’s also in the process of developing a zero-waste plan with RRS this year: “We’re very proud, but we know we could do better.”
Local programs key in on community impact as state policies expand. | Courtesy of the city of Long Beach.
This article appeared in the February 2025 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
Combining mattress recycling with social and workforce services has emerged as a consistent approach around the country as more of the U.S. gradually begins recycling its mattresses and bedsprings for scrap metal, wood and other materials, several program leaders said in recent interviews.
“We create job opportunities for those in need of second chances — recovering drug addicts and homeless veterans — ensuring people don’t fall through the cracks of the economy,” said Ryan Tiano, chief operations officer of Isaiah 58 Inc., a Nashville nonprofit operating Spring Back Mattress Recycling out of locations in Nashville, Colorado and Utah. The organization hires people who have completed or are enrolled in a drug and alcohol recovery program, sober living facility or transitional home.
Combined, the three Spring Back programs recycle approximately 150,000 mattresses per year, or more than 9 million cubic feet of landfill space.
“These groups face enormous barriers to successfully re-entering society, making it nearly impossible to find work and achieve financial independence,” Tiano said. “Our team assists these people in combating social injustice and creating transitional employment opportunities.”
The successes of Spring Back and other organizations like it come as mattress recycling policies slowly expand. Oregon in January joined California, Connecticut and Rhode Island in implementing a statewide mattress program. These states impose a flat fee ranging from $16 to $22.50 on every mattress or box spring purchased, whether online or in stores. The fees fund recycling programs managed by the bedding industry-backed Mattress Recycling Council.
Among the three original states, more than 15 million mattresses have been recycled, resulting in 500 million pounds of recycled material. This year the International Sleep Products Association, the council’s founder, is also lobbying for similar legislation in New York, Massachusetts, Maryland and Virginia.
“Our expansion into Oregon reflects the bedding industry’s commitment to recycling,” Mike O’Donnell, MRC’s chief operating officer, said in a written statement. “We’re grateful for the support of Oregon’s solid waste community, mattress retailers and manufacturers as we embark on this exciting new chapter.”
Up to 75% of a mattress can be recycled, with steel springs, foam padding, wood frames and fabrics finding new life in various industries, said Tom Smith, marketing manager for the MRC.
“Steel, in particular, finds a robust market,” he said. “In traditional box springs, slinky-like steel springs are cut out, compacted by recyclers, and sometimes shredded before being baled and sold in the scrap market.”
The evolution of mattress design has introduced pocket coils — individual high-carbon steel springs wrapped in polypropylene fabric sleeves. While they present challenges in separation, demand for scrap ferrous steel remains high. Older Bonnell coils, known for their hourglass shape and high carbon content, also boast a strong resale market when properly processed.
“The foam padding is popular with those in the carpet industry,” Smith said. “Most of this material is polyurethane, which is collected and compressed into giant bales. It is then repurposed into carpet padding.”
Wood from the mattress frames typically ends up being ground into compost or processed for biomass fuel. However, the presence of staples in the wooden frames complicates these reuse efforts.
The textiles from mattress toppers face a tougher market due to low demand. Some of this fabric can be converted into insulation, while innovative experiments are underway to transform it through a baking process into carbon elements for use in batteries, potentially powering electric vehicles, Smith noted.
“Pilot projects are also exploring the use of foam as a concrete additive, enhancing strength,” Smith said. “Another innovative initiative is investigating the foam’s potential for use as an oil spill absorbent, providing an eco-friendly alternative to newly manufactured sponges. Researchers are also working on transforming foam into pellets that can be molded into various products such as cell phone cases and industrial gaskets.”
Landfill disposal brings its own challenges, with mattresses often requiring up to 100 years to break down completely and sometimes getting stuck in compactors. The Mattress Recycling Council reports that every ton of discarded mattresses recycled preserves 99 cubic yards of landfill. Considering Americans dispose of an estimated 15 to 20 million mattresses each year, that’s a lot of space that recycling efforts can save.
The number of mattresses that MRC has recycled has grown over the past decade. However, after a peak in the final years of the pandemic, the growth has slowed or remained flat, depending upon the state.
Courtesy of Binghampton Development Corporation
“Recycling mattresses is important because it conserves valuable resources; and by using mattress materials to make new products, energy is saved, water is conserved and greenhouse gas emissions are prevented,” O’Donnell said. “It also supports local economies by creating jobs and preventing illegal dumping.”
The MRC manages the state “Bye Bye Mattress” programs by using collected fees to contract with local governments or private haulers to establish drop-off sites, including at landfills or transfer stations, and with recycling organizations that dismantle the mattresses. It also organizes bulk pickups from institutions like hotels and colleges.
In Long Beach, California, an estimated 18,000 mattresses are illegally dumped in Long Beach each year, which was the catalyst for the Department of Public Works’ Clean Team hosting mattress drop-off events on the first Saturday of every month in April 2023. The program was aimed at reducing blight and the potential health risk associated with illegally dumped mattresses by eliminating homes for pests like rats and insects.
The city sends collected mattresses to an MRC facility, where they are cut open and sorted by material type. A 90-day pilot program for 24/7 mattress drop off began last August and was made permanent in November, allowing residents to drop off mattresses free of charge.
“The mattress drop-off program provides a convenient and accessible option for Long Beach residents to properly dispose of used mattresses,” said Jose Bedolla, Clean Team superintendent for the city. “By offering this service year-round, the city’s Clean Team can redirect their efforts from collecting illegally dumped mattresses in public spaces to other critical services that maintain a healthy and safe environment.”
He added that diverting mattress materials from landfills not only reduces the amount of waste generated in Long Beach but also brings the city closer to its emissions reduction goals. Residents that can’t bring their mattresses to the drop-off site can still recycle their mattresses responsibly by requesting a special collection online or by phone.
Bedolla noted that while Long Beach’s mattress recycling program doesn’t provide direct job training, it does utilize the assistance of the Conservation Corps of Long Beach, which provides workforce development
opportunities for young adults.
A number of mattress recycling programs have a secondary component of social assistance, as they offer people who are down on their luck — those recently out of prison or rehab, those part of disadvantaged communities and so on — the chance to build basic job skills.
A group of Belmont University students came up with the idea for Spring Back Recycling in 2012, then partnered with Belmont Church and their Isaiah 58 ministry to enact it in Nashville, said Tiano, the Isaiah 58 chief operation officer. Two years later, Spring Back partnered with the Davidson County Sheriff Department to provide transitional employment to inmates upon release and recycled more than 80,000 mattresses that year.
Over time, the program grew to working with multiple halfway houses in the area to employ and teach life skills to people recovering from substance abuse and addiction.
“People generally need a place to live and a positive environment, and then they need something to do every day that is safe,” Tiano said. “We put this idea into play and made it work, and learned along the way. We wanted to change the lives of men, and therefore their families and the community for the better.”
Originally, the thought was that Spring Back would be franchised, but while that didn’t happen, the idea was shared with other organizations and new independently-owned locations popped up around the U.S., including in Salt Lake City and Commerce City, Colorado.
Workers at all three facilities slash, tear apart and crush mattresses to separate out foam, cotton, steel, wood and the fabric, and the materials go into items like car seats, dog beds, carpet padding and insulation.
Tiano noted there are tons of success stories of men whose lives have changed because of the program, but one of his favorite examples is someone who started recycling mattresses 10 years ago, had multiple children and was fresh out of jail for failing to pay child support. He’s now the warehouse manager for Spring Back Nashville.
“He now has his own place, his own car, and two years ago he got full custody of his 11-year-old daughter,” Tiano said. “The generational effect of that is tremendous. You’re not only changing his life, but the life of his daughter as well.”
Andy Kizzee, business hub director of Binghampton Development Corporation, a nonprofit in Memphis, Tennessee, said its mattress recycling program also was inspired by Spring Back. BDC processes around 200-400 mattresses a month. More than 100 people have taken part in the program, with almost half now employed in full-time jobs elsewhere.
“We’re hoping to grow and break into larger quantities from retailers and bigger institutions,” Kizzee said.
Second Chance Recycling in Minnesota began mattress recycling in 2008. Four years later, it teamed with Furnish Office & Home and Rebuild Resources to form Momentum Enterprises, which then merged with Emerge Community Development in 2015 to focus on community impact.
“Emerge helps people find work and get off welfare, so Second Chance is pretty much staffed by those recently released from incarceration or as condition of their parole; we don’t ask questions, we bring them in and help them,” said Shawn Dolan, general manager of Second Chance. “We teach them good work skills and how to recycle the mattresses, and this is transitional employment.”
The training can include forklift training, safety and security. Those in the program learn the proper way to cut and dismantle the different mattress components, with runners moving and separating the materials into bailers and other equipment.
“The metal is all bailed into large 250-pound rolls and goes to metal recyclers, and that has the most consistent demand,” Dolan said. “The wood from the box springs are crushed into a compactor, and wood recyclers will then grind them for mulch. We bail a bunch of cotton as well, which goes to a textile recycler and turns it into new fabric.”
By recycling 70,000 mattresses a year, Second Chance Recycling keeps the equivalent of a full year of waste from more than 2,800 households out of landfills. Many are picked up from residents, and others come from retailers, mattress manufacturers, hotels and multifamily properties.
“People don’t have any idea how hard it is for mattresses to decompose; it’s a huge fire risk, they don’t crush and take up an enormous amount of room,” Dolan said. “There are hundreds of thousands of mattresses that don’t get recycled, and more needs to be done.”
The EPA administrator pointed to staffing, office space and grants as areas to cut agency spending. | Tada Images
Details are scarce on U.S. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin’s plans to cut his agency’s spending by 65% or more, but some of its 15,000 full-time-equivalent positions and grants to recycling programs across the country could be on the chopping block. Continue Reading
Modernizing bottle bills could bring U.S. recycling up to speed with other systems around the world. | Josep Curto/Shutterstock
This article appeared in the February 2025 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
The United States is grappling with a growing recycling crisis. Despite decades of environmental campaigns and investments in recycling infrastructure, recycling rates have stagnated, with many states seeing declines. According to Ball Packaging’s latest 50 States of Recycling report, only 32% of the material value in the packaging waste stream is being captured for recycling, leading to an estimated $6.5 billion worth of valuable materials lost to landfills annually.
Beverage containers — aluminum cans, plastic bottles and glass — are some of the most recyclable materials, yet millions still go to waste each year. In fact, between 2015 and 2024, an estimated 1.5 trillion beverage containers were wasted in the U.S., including 785 billion PET bottles, 553 billion metal cans and 220 billion glass bottles, according to Reloop’s What We Waste Dashboard. Americans wasted an average of 504 beverage containers per person in 2024 alone, including 60 glass bottles, 181 metal cans and 263 PET bottles. If current collection rates remain unchanged, an additional 878.6 billion beverage containers are expected to be wasted between 2025 and 2029.
Deposit return systems, known as “bottle bills” in the U.S., offer a proven solution. Operating in 57 jurisdictions worldwide, including 10 U.S. states, these programs incentivize recycling by attaching refundable deposits to beverage containers, encouraging consumers to return them to designated collection points. In the last four years alone, 11 countries and territories have introduced a deposit system including two Australian states, Austria, Slovakia, Latvia, Malta, Romania, and the Republic of Ireland.
If a national best-in-class DRS were introduced today in the U.S., an estimated 447 billion units of beverage containers could be captured instead of lost. This includes 206.4 billion PET bottles, 172.8 billion metal cans and 68.5 billion glass bottles. Recycling these 447 billion containers could generate nearly 30.7 million metric tons of material for reuse, valued at approximately $5.5 billion at 2024 prices, while avoiding over 31 million metric tons of carbon emissions — equivalent to not burning 17.4 million tons of coal or saving 3.5 billion gallons of gasoline.
In 2023, nine of the 10 states with the highest recycling rates had bottle bill programs, the Ball report found. On average, states with DRS recycle 27% more packaging (excluding fiber and flexible plastics) through closed-loop end markets compared to non-DRS states (34% versus 7%). For PET bottles specifically, states with bottle bills recycle over 3.5 times more on a per-capita basis than those without. Although these 10 states represent just 27% of the U.S. population, they account for 47% of all packaging (excluding film and flexible packaging) recycled and 51% of all beverage containers recycled nationwide.
Despite these successes, there remains significant untapped potential. Expanding and modernizing existing bottle bill programs, as well as introducing new ones in states without them, could dramatically boost recycling rates, reduce waste and recover billions of dollars in valuable materials currently lost to disposal. Additionally, these programs could provide brand owners with an increased supply of recycled feedstock, helping them meet both voluntary and legislated recycled content targets.
While states with DRS consistently outperform their non-DRS counterparts, many U.S. bottle bill programs are outdated and underperform compared to international leaders.
Reloop’s Global Deposit Book 2024, released in December, revealed that the average return rate for single-use beverage containers in U.S. DRS programs was just 62% in 2023, much lower than the European average of 87% and the Canadian average of 76%.
The latest return rates in deposit return systems for single-use beverage containers in the U.S. (excludes material collected from curbside recycling programs or MRFs).
Reloop’s analysis of over 55 deposit return systems worldwide highlights three critical factors that significantly impact return rates:
Deposit values: Higher deposit values are strongly correlated with higher return rates. Reloop’s data shows that jurisdictions with minimum deposits below 10 cents achieve a median return rate of 69%, while those with deposits of at least 15 cents reach a median return rate of 92%.
In 2023, Michigan and Oregon were the only two states with a $0.10 minimum deposit, and they achieved two of the top three return rates among U.S. bottle bill programs. However, $0.10 is much lower than deposits in most leading international DRS programs, such as Germany ($0.26, all figures in U.S. dollars), Norway ($0.18-$0.26), Finland ($0.10-$0.41) and Denmark ($0.14-$0.42), where return rates exceed 90%.
Many U.S. bottle bill programs have also failed to adjust deposit amounts for inflation, eroding their value over time. This reduces the incentive for consumers to participate and contributes to return fatigue, where the effort of returning containers outweighs the perceived reward. Oregon’s experience demonstrates the impact of increasing deposit values: when the state doubled its deposit from $0.05 to $0.10 in 2017, the redemption rate climbed 22% within three years.
Convenient return processes: Accessibility of return options plays a major role in DRS performance. Jurisdictions with a return-to-retail model — where retailers are legally required to accept container returns and pay out refunds — achieve a median return rate of 84%. This is significantly higher than the 69% median return rate in jurisdictions relying on redemption centers or a hybrid model, where redemption centers operate alongside retail stores.
Among U.S. states with bottle bills, only Michigan operates a pure R2R model. Michigan law mandates that retailers accept containers of the same kinds, sizes and brands they sell, with no opt-out provisions. In contrast, other states operate hybrid redemption models that often allow retailers to opt out if they meet certain criteria, such as proximity to a redemption center. These systems are less convenient than R2R models, which allow consumers to return containers where they shop.
Comprehensive program scope: Programs with broad scopes that include a wide range of beverages and container types consistently achieve higher return rates. New York’s experience highlights this: When water bottles were added to its system in 2009, the number of PET plastic containers returned for recycling doubled, according to a 2021 report from Tomra, which manufactures sorters and other recycling equipment. Similarly, Denmark provides a compelling example.
Despite already achieving a world-leading beverage packaging recycling rate of 90% in 2018, the Danish government expanded its DRS in 2020 to include single-use juice and concentrate bottles, which it projected would result in an additional 52 million bottles being recycled annually, increasing the volume of recyclable packaging in the system by 4-5%.
In the U.S., some states exclude significant beverage categories from their bottle bill programs, such as non-carbonated beverages (e.g., bottled water, juice, milk), wine and spirits, and sports drinks. These exclusions limit the volume of materials captured and the program’s overall effectiveness.
Latest return rates in deposit return systems for single-use beverage containers, by redemption model (excludes material collected from curbside recycling programs or MRFs).
Several states are making strides toward modernizing their bottle bill programs, even as challenges remain.
In Connecticut, the program was expanded to cover additional beverages (noncarbonated beverages, hard cider, and malt-based seltzer) in January 2023, and the deposit amount doubled from $0.05 to $0.10 on Jan. 1, 2024. Early results are promising: By Q3 2024, Connecticut reported a return rate of 74.2%, a nearly 24-point jump from the end of 2023 and a 29-point increase compared to Q3 2023. This marks the state’s highest quarterly return rate since December 2013 (76.1%), according to state data.
California has also taken major steps forward. Effective Jan. 1, 2024, its bottle bill now includes wine and distilled spirits, as well as 100% fruit and vegetable juices. According to the Container Recycling Institute, these changes have resulted in the recycling of over half a billion additional bottles and cans annually.
Other states, including Massachusetts and New York, have encountered obstacles in their modernization efforts. In Massachusetts, a proposal to increase deposit values, handling fees and beverage coverage as part of a broader climate bill failed to pass before the legislative session ended. Similarly, New York’s proposed 2024 updates, which aimed to raise deposit values and expand program scope, didn’t advance. Despite these setbacks, the ongoing discussions signal growing interest in improving DRS programs nationwide.
Beyond the U.S., the adoption of deposit systems is rapidly accelerating, as an increasing number of governments recognize their effectiveness in boosting recycling rates and tackling the global challenges of plastic pollution and climate change.
Reloop’s Global Deposit Book 2024 reveals that as of January, nearly 357 million people worldwide live in jurisdictions with DRS for single-use beverage containers. With the expected implementation of already-announced legislation, this figure is expected to grow to approximately 641 million people across 70 jurisdictions by the end of 2027. Among the countries and regions set to launch new DRS programs in the coming years are Poland (October 2025), Turkey (2025), the Australian state of Tasmania (2025), the Czech Republic (2026), Singapore (2026), Portugal (2026) and the four nations of the U.K. (2027). Spain is also expected to introduce a DRS by the end of 2026. A recent government report from Madrid confirmed that Spain fell short of its 2023 target to separately collect 70% of plastic bottles, triggering a legal requirement to implement a DRS within two years.
Growth of population covered by deposit return systems for single-use beverage containers (1970-2004 actual; 2025-2027 projected).
This global surge in DRS adoption is fueled by several key factors:
Proven effectiveness: DRS consistently outperforms other collection systems, achieving recovery rates of 90% or higher for beverage containers. Glass Packaging Institute data shows that glass bottle recycling rates are 63% in DRS states compared to just 24% in non-DRS states. Similar differences can be seen for aluminum cans: The 10 states with DRS boast an average aluminum can recycling rate of 68% compared to an average of 22% in non-DRS states. A 2024 Massachusetts Institute of Technology study concluded that implementing a nationwide DRS in the U.S. could significantly increase the U.S. recycling rate for PET bottles, from 29% (2022) to 82%.
Legislated recycling targets: The European Union’s new Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation, adopted in 2024, mandates a 90% separate collection for recycling rate for plastic bottles and cans by 2029. To meet this target, member states must implement a DRS unless they achieve an 80% collection rate by 2026. Although member states can avoid DRS if they reach the 80% target, it will be nearly impossible for many of them, with current collection rates below 60% (e.g., Spain, France, and Italy), to do so without a DRS in place.
Strong public support: Multiple recent polls highlight this widespread approval for such systems. A 2022 nationwide survey of U.S. voters from the Aluminum Association found that 81% were in favor of DRS programs, with strong support across all political and demographic groups. A 2024 poll of Massachusetts residents showed that 87% were in support of having a bottle bill program and that 82% were in favor of expanding it to cover additional beverages. Respondents cited municipal and taxpayer savings, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and improved recycling outcomes as key benefits.
Increasing industry support: Major industry groups, including the Can Manufacturers Institute and Aluminum Association, have endorsed DRS as essential for securing clean materials to meet sustainability goals. In its latest aluminum beverage can recycling rate targets progress report, the Aluminum Association and CMI identify the implementation of well-designed DRSs at both the state and federal levels as a key strategy for making progress toward achieving its aluminum can recycling targets. According to the CMI, a national DRS could deliver a 48-percentage point increase in the U.S. aluminum beverage can recycling rate (50 billion more aluminum beverage cans would be recycled).
Recycled content mandates: Legislation requiring recycled content in packaging has increased demand for high-quality recyclables. DRS programs are uniquely positioned to supply clean, uncontaminated materials, ensuring manufacturers meet these requirements efficiently. The 2024 MIT study found that the supply needs of packaging producers could be met through a nationwide DRS with a 10-cent deposit at a net cost of about 1 cent per bottle produced when demand is strong.
The U.S. recycling system is at a crossroads. Stagnating recycling rates and the loss of valuable materials highlight the urgent need for systemic change. Among the potential solutions, bottle bills — especially when modernized — are a proven and effective tool for addressing these systemic issues.
Modernizing deposit return systems by increasing deposit values, expanding coverage to include a broader range of beverage containers and improving accessibility and convenience for consumers can unlock their full potential. These enhancements would transform the U.S. recycling landscape by not only driving higher recycling rates but also recapturing billions of dollars in material value that would otherwise be lost to landfills or incineration. Not to mention the recovered and recycled U.S.-made RPET could be sold not only to domestic end users but also to meet Europe’s growing demand for RPET — providing a significant boost to the U.S. economy.
The momentum is already building. States such as Connecticut and California have demonstrated that modernized DRS programs can deliver measurable results in a short period. Moreover, industry stakeholders increasingly recognize the value of these systems in securing clean, high-quality recyclables to meet sustainability and recycled content mandates. Aligning U.S. programs with global best practices can ensure the country remains competitive in a world moving decisively toward a circular economy. The path forward is clear: Modernizing DRS in the U.S. is not just a choice but a necessity for a circular economy.
Clarissa Morawski is the CEO and co-founder of Reloop Platform, an international nonprofit focused on advancing circular economy initiatives. She can be contacted at [email protected].
Samantha Millette, research and analysis manager for Reloop Platform, can be reached at [email protected].
Editor’s note: This story has been updated with more recent data, so some figures differ slightly from what appeared in print.