Recovered fiber and aluminum prices have taken a beating over the past month, but a key plastic grade, PET, has shown stability.
Cascadia Consulting Group compiled single-family recycling composition data utilizing studies conducted in the past three years in five western and southern U.S. cities.
The five municipalities all operate single-stream recycling collection and have populations ranging from 600,000 to 2.2 million. The chart below provides a breakout of types and amounts of contaminants, defined as materials not accepted in the programs.
Although contamination rates ranged widely – from 12 to 32 percent – researchers found consistency in terms of material types: non-conforming paper; food, green waste and wood; and other non-recyclables.
Data Corner is compiled monthly by recycling consultancy RRS. For this edition, the company collaborated with Cascadia Consulting.
This article originally appeared in the June 2017 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
As educational leaders take their much-deserved summer breather, they might finally have some time to consider how to bolster materials recovery in schools.
The cafeteria could be a great place to start. Resources are available to help schools set up or enhance their recycling/composting programs to recover food waste and recyclables, including some often-overlooked materials like cartons and foam trays.
Schools can play a sustainable role in the community while teaching the students about responsible living – a lesson that can then transfer back into their homes.
Data Corner is compiled monthly by recycling consultancy RRS.
This article originally appeared in the July 2017 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
RRS analyzed commodity pricing from several published reports to compare U.S. and European pricing data for recycled fiber and glass.
Although making a precise comparison is challenging due to differences in traded grades and local composition, the findings nonetheless highlight divergences in pricing between the two jurisdictions.
The differences can likely be attributed to the large source-separated collection footprint in Europe, which delivers quality glass and fiber to the market.
This is supported by the fact that materials recovery facilities (MRFs) in Europe see similar pricing to U.S. MRFs on glass collected in single-stream systems, due to the need for secondary cleaning and sorting.
Data Corner is compiled monthly by recycling consultancy RRS.
This article originally appeared in the August 2017 issue of Resource Recycling. Subscribe today for access to all print content.
