Information Regarding the Possible Elimination of Plastic Bags as
an
Approved Recycling Container
|
Current program:
-
Plastic bags may be used
to contain recyclables, but are discouraged
-
Plastic bags include reused retail bags,
and clear or blue large
bags sold by retailers for containing recyclables
-
The larger Blue Box was
distributed for the 'containers' stream for a greater Blue Box
capacity with the hopes of heavily decreasing plastic bag use for
recyclables
|
Potential Program:
|
|
 |
 |
|
Reasons to keep plastic bags:
|
Reasons to eliminate plastic bags:
-
Saves money
-
Operation benefits
-
Promotes Zero Waste
|
More information
The following information is from the Report: Potential Changes to the Blue
Box Recycling Program, presented to the May 3, 2011 meeting of the Community and
Neighbourhoods Committee.
Eliminating Plastic Bags as an Approved Recycling Container
Background
Residents are allowed a number of options for containing their Blue Box
recyclables at the curb. They can use Blue Boxes, grocery bags (newspapers
only), clear bags and translucent Blue Bags. Curbside audits were conducted in
2007 and 2010 and determined that over 85% of London households are using their
Blue Boxes.
The Blue Box is the most popular container but a significant portion
of Londoners use a grocery bag or Program Bag for containing recyclables. A
summary of advantages of either eliminating (except for shredded paper) or
keeping the use of plastic bags is listed in Table 1.
TABLE 1: Advantages of Eliminating Plastic Bags as a Collection Container
Advantages of Eliminating Plastic Bags as a Collection
Container (except for shredded paper)
|
| Saves money ($250,000 to $400,000 per year) |
Miller Waste Systems submitted processing costs based on different
program options including with and without plastic bags being permitted
in the Blue Box recycling program. If plastic bags are removed, there
will be a cost reduction of approximately $6 to $8 per tonne associated
the elimination of opening plastic bags at the MRF.
Collection operators are unable to remove contamination or sort
recyclables into two streams when residents using plastic bags make a
mistake. This increases contamination and
results in increased processing costs. . If plastic bags are removed, it
is estimated there will be a further cost reduction of approximately $4
to $8 per tonne associated with less contamination and
cross-contamination in the material needing to be processed.
Overall, there will be a $10 to $16 per tonne ($250,000 to $400,000)
reduction in processing costs. |
| Provides operational benefits at the new Regional MRF |
Plastic bags can cause operational problems at MRFs including damage
to recycling equipment and contamination of other materials. Damage is
caused by the plastic bags wrapping around moving pieces in the
conveyors, screens and processing equipment. |
| More consistent with other municipalities |
Many municipalities have phased out the use of plastic bags as
curbside containers in recycling systems or restrict the use:
- 3 of 6 municipalities with a population of over 200,000 and
using a two-stream MRF do not allow any type of plastic bag
- 5 of 8 municipalities in southwestern Ontario and potential
customers of the regional MRF do not allow any type of plastic bag
|
| Promotes zero waste |
Reducing the use of plastic bags is consistent with London's Zero
Waste initiatives and with the larger goal to reduce plastic bag use. |
Summary
There are significant advantages for eliminating the use of plastic bags to
collect recyclables except for shredded paper. Advantages of no plastic bags
are: annual cost savings, improved sorting and quality of recyclables, reduced
waste by reduced plastic use and consistency with the majority of comparable
municipalities.
There are also very important advantages to keeping the program as is which
include choice and convenience for residents and litter control. For some
households, plastic bags are an important part of the recycling system.
The full report may be found at the link below (report presented to the
Community and Neighbourhoods Committee on May 3, 2011, pages 45- 60 of 208):
http://www.london.ca/d.aspx?s=/meetings/CNC%20Agendas/2011-05-03%20Agenda/MeetingPackages.htm