The survey that we conducted was the first ever comprehensive review of municipal trash hauling and curbside recycling programs in Colorado. While we focused on curbside recycling activities through this survey, it should be noted that there is an extensive infrastructure for drop off recycling throughout Colorado. Colorado Recycles created and maintains the only comprehensive statewide guide to recycling resources in the state. That Recycling Guide is available on the Colorado Recycles website at http://www.colorado-recycles.org/main.html (just follow the prompts to the Guide).

The Guide has information that tracks 50 different products and materials and houses information about recyclers for approximately 2,000 separate recycling resources. Recyclers are categorized by whether they are a drop off facility, a curbside program (information from this survey has been used to expand those listings), a statewide or regional recycler, a nonprofit organization that conducts recycling (El Jebel Shrine, Habitat for Humanity, etc.) or a national recycler. The latter group includes national takeback programs sponsored by computer manufacturers, hazardous waste recyclers and other recyclers that have a national market presence.

In responding to the survey, a significant number of municipalities that reported that they do not have curbside recycling available in their communities provided us with information about local drop off programs. These responses, together with the data already collected by Colorado Recycles, is a testament not only to the extensive recycling infrastructure that exists in Colorado but also to the developing sophistication of that infrastructure. Rather than having only one option available, communities can now employ multiple strategies to more precisely target their efforts to accomplish their recycling goals and objectives. Each strategy has strengths and weaknesses, but it is important to understand that no particular strategy is a priori "the best" strategy. The strengths and weaknesses of any given strategy should be evaluated in relation to the goals and objectives of the program, the targeted material and why it has been targeted, the cost effectiveness of the use of resources needed to conduct the program, the determination of who bears the risks of the program, and how that evaluation compares to other options.

Consider the two leading strategies, drop off recycling and curbside recycling. For this discussion, the two terms are used very expansively, much broader than the customary focus on residential communities.

Drop Off Recycling - Tried, True and Reliable

Drop off recycling was the predominant strategy used in the early days of focused recycling. It was, and is, generally very low tech. One basically needs an easily accessible drop off site for the container; the container; someone to service the site to collect the materials, clean up the debris and make the site attractive; a transfer point to take the collected materials to where the material will be further separated, contaminants removed, and the material bundled for transport to a facility that uses the material for the making of other products; and a market for the collected material. The latter point is very important. If there is no market for the material, there is little merit in trying to recycle it since there will be no end destination for the material once it is collected.

This simple system relies upon public participation and a certain level of commitment by the public to use it. It requires that the consumer identify the material to be recycled (e.g., aluminum cans), the consumer to separate that material and place it in some sort of storage receptacle at their home, and then transporting the material to the drop off. Frequently, the recycler who operates the drop off site will impose certain handling instructions - please rinse, no lids, etc. - which increases the responsibility for the consumer. Failing to meet the handling requirements results in a higher percentage of contaminants entering the drop off site, which in turn increases the cost and reduces the efficiency of the sorting process at the transfer point.

The advantage of the drop off strategy is its low cost and low tech nature. The disadvantage is that it relies heavily on consumer participation. Consumer participation requires a significant commitment to set aside, separate, clean, store and transport the material. It is very easy for a consumer to be an episodic recycler rather than a regular recycler depending upon what else may be going on in his or her life. However, drop off sites are frequently accessible to the public 24 hours a day, seven days a week, which make them extremely easy for the commuting public to use. Drop off recycling may also be the most appropriate strategy for multifamily communities that cannot be serviced by curbside programs.

It should be noted that some consumers may not be able to participate in this kind of program. Those who are disabled or elderly have restrictions that may not allow them to transport the materials without outside assistance. A community that employs this strategy should take into consideration citizens with special needs.

A second disadvantage is that the drop off site must be maintained and kept clean. This responsibility generally falls upon the owner of the site. In some cases, a separate storage facility may be needed to handle any overflow of the containers until the material can be collected and transported to the transfer station. That secondary storage area must also be kept clean. An example would be a drop off site sponsored by a grocery store. The drop off receptacles must be made convenient for the public to use. The grocer does not want to have a drop off receptacle to get out of control, so must either service it regularly to keep it neat or to assign employees to assist the consumer in dropping off the material. Moreover, the grocer does not want containers that may have some residual food or beverage on his property because it can be attractive to rodents and flies and create an undesirable situation.

Targeted Drop Off Programs

However, drop off recycling has become more specialized and sophisticated. While there still remains an extensive use of the older drop off systems, newer drop off systems often target a particular product or material and are designed to be a self-contained system.

A particularly successful example of a targeted drop off system is that employed by the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation (http://www.rbrc.org/call2recycle/). This program was specifically designed to collect rechargeable batteries and has expanded to include cellular phones. RBRC provides collection boxes that include pre-paid, pre-addressed shipping labels, safety instructions and plastic bags for each used battery and old cell phone. Once a collection container is full, it is shipped to the recycling facility. RBRC pays for the shipping and recycling costs. When a participant fills their box up and ships it to the recycling center, RBRC automatically sends new collection boxes and support materials.

Recovered materials can be used to make new products - the cadmium is used to make new batteries, while the nickel and iron are used to make stainless steel products. Cell phones are refurbished and resold when possible. A portion of the proceeds from the resale of the cell phones is used to benefit select charities. The program is absolutely free for consumers, retailers, communities, public agencies and businesses.

RBRC and Colorado Recycles have cross listed participants in their respective data bases, and those listings can be found in the Colorado Recycles Recycling Guide and through a search engine on the RBRC website..

Not only is the program very successful and well financed, it is a strategy that can be employed by any community through public sites (such as fire stations, city hall and other offices), schools, businesses, churches and so on. By using this program, a community does not need to include rechargeable batteries and cell phones in its recycling program and use its resources to support it.

Another example of specialized drop off recycling that is becoming increasingly utilized is household hazardous waste collection. Some communities have launched HHW drop off facilities in conjunction with landfill operations, transfer stations and other locations. These sites tend to be permanent and are structured for the proper disposal and storage of the waste. Household hazardous waste collection also utilizes curbside strategies, community round up events and some specialized national recyclers have shipping programs to assist consumers and businesses.

Many of these events are annual events, and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment maintains a listing of community round up events on its website at http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hm/hhwcollect.htm. In addition, Colorado Recycles provides a free listing on its website and its monthly electronic newsletter. Some recurring events are also listed in the Colorado Recycles Recycling Guide.

Curbside Recycling - The Emerging Strategy

Curbside recycling programs are a more recent phenomenon. According to estimates by the US Environmental Protection Agency, in 1997, approximately 51% of the residential population had access to curbside recycling services. Also according to US EPA estimates, in 2000 there were 9,250 curbside recycling programs in operation throughout the country.

Since this survey was our first effort, our questions were necessarily general so that we could develop a snapshot of curbside programs and develop more sophisticated survey tools for follow up efforts. As is the case with drop off recycling, new strategies and technologies have altered the face of curbside recycling. Among the changes that have altered curbside programs has been the ability to handle a broad mix of products. In its early years, curbside recycling required the consumer to sort the recyclables into different containers for collection. Generally, these were of two types: beverage type sorts and paper type sorts.

Source separation requires changes in household behavior. It is very similar to the behavior required for drop off recycling programs that require the consumer to separate recyclables into streams and place them in the right receptacle. Curbside source separation is essentially the same. Each material is desigated to a particular bin, and the significant difference is that the consumer is no longer required to transport the material to a drop off site, just to the curb. The simplification of transportation requirements makes it easier to gain consumer participation in the program and to have the consumer participate on a regular basis rather than an episodic basis.

Further refinements to material management were achieved when the haulers became proficient at handling mixed stream recyclables. A popular version of this change has been the commingled recyclable streams which allow, for example, all containers to be commingled and all papers to be commingled. The commingling also expanded the types of materials that can be included. Container streams expanded beyond aluminum cans, glass bottles and plastic beverage containers to include many other types of containers common to household products. Paper commingling allowed for the inclusion of junk mail, magazines, catalogs and inserts as well as newspapers and the traditional office paper.

More recent improvements to material management have allowed the handlers to successfully accept materials in what is commonly known as a single stream system. In this system, all the recyclable materials are placed together in a single receptacle and the handlers at the material recovery facility separate all the materials into appropriate streams of materials.

All of these improvements have made curbside recycling easier for the consumer and have had a positive effect on participation. However, establishing a curbside recycling program is much more expensive than establishing a drop off program. Depending upon the design of the program, the start up costs for specialized vehicles, material containers that can be serviced by those vehicles and personnel costs can be quite high. The great advantage of curbside is its consumer friendliness, the great disadvantage is its capital and operation costs.

Public Education Is Important

Whichever program, or combination of programs, is selected, public and consumer education is a critical component. Consumers need to not only be aware that the program is in existence, they must also know what is expected of them as participants. This education must be an ongoing effort and resources must be committed to making sure that it communicates needed information in an understandable manner (including other languages), that it reaches the audiences it is intended to inform, and that it is timely.

Specialized Curbside Recycling Programs

Our survey focused on residential curbside recycling programs, but there are also specialized curbside recycling services that are provided. Many national manufacturers provide specialized pick up services. Examples can be found with computer equipment, local large appliance pick up programs, many local yard debris programs and with curbside household hazardous waste programs. The variety of these more specialized programs is another indication that the recycling industries are becoming more sophisticated in their targeting and that transportation costs are becoming less of an obstacle.

Summarizing the Data From the Survey

For the information in this table, we relied not only on the municipalities' responses to the survey, we also used local newsletters, municipal websites and the Colorado Recycles Recycling Guide to determine if there were drop off programs in the community.

It is very common for drop off programs and curbside programs to exist in the same community. We have tried to identify as many of those communities as possible to avoid double counting them. Since this was a survey that looked at curbside rather than drop off, we did not include the community in the drop off statistics if that community had a curbside program. It is assumed that if the community has a curbside program, there are drop off programs in existence as well.

Of the communities surveyed, the largest number (55) rely on contracts between trash haulers and customers to determine whether curbside recycling will be a service, what materials would be included in the program and the financial arrangements. Our survey did not extend to the private sector, but we are in the design phase of a survey instrument to solicit information from those providers. Because Colorado does not regulate trash haulers at the state level, there is no central list of them. Entry and exit from the market is relatively simple, so there is some volatility among the haulers as people start up businesses, merge, sell out or simply cease business operations. These communities represent 47.2% of the municipal population.

There were 40 communities that either provide curbside recycling directly, under a contract with private providers or else require trash haulers doing business in their community to either provide or at least offer curbside recycling. Collectively these 40 communities serve 42.9% of the municipal population used in the survey.

It is tempting to add these numbers together and report that just over 90% of the municipal population is served by curbside, but that would be highly inaccurate. What we can say with accuracy is that no less than 42.9% of the population has access to municipal curbside service, and some additional percentage has access through private contract arrangements. We do not know at this point how many of those private situations exist and what populations they may serve.

Additionally, stating that a community has access to curbside is not the same thing as stating that 100% of the citizens actually participate. Participation rates are highly volatile and making assumptions is perilous. In some long established and successful programs, participation rates generally approximate 50% of those eligible to participate. In some stable neighborhoods, the participation rate may be as high as 80% or 90%, while in some transient neighborhoods with high resident turnover, the participation rate may be as low as 10%.

The following table displays the summarized data (for a community-by-community listing, please refer to the tables under Survey Results ):