1 / 20

Use of Existing Methodology No Longer Feasible

Join us for a workshop focused on improving recycling rates for Rigid Plastic Packaging Containers (RPPCs) on February 5, 2004, from 9:00 AM to 1:00 PM at Cal/EPA in Sacramento, CA. This session will address current challenges in recycling methodologies, regional differences in RPPC usage, and the need for more accurate data. Key discussions will include the integration of data sources from Canada and Mexico, population adjustments, and the importance of accessible, timely statistics to enhance recycling efforts. For more information, contact Sue Ingle at 916-341-6511 or single@ciwmb.ca.gov.

zarifa
Télécharger la présentation

Use of Existing Methodology No Longer Feasible

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Rigid Plastic Packaging Container(RPPC) Recycling Rates WorkshopFebruary 5, 20049:00 am – 1:00 pmCal/EPA1001 “I” StreetSacramento, CA 95814Sierra Hearing RoomContact: Sue Ingle 916-341-6511 or single@ciwmb.ca.gov

  2. Use of Existing Methodology No Longer Feasible • Adjustment for Population: • Data sources now include Canada and Mexico • Differences in use of RPPCs by region • Data not published in format or timeframe needed by Board • Can not accurately disaggregate for RPPCs • No import data • Not published in time to meet commitment to provide advance notice

  3. All-Container Recycling Rate All-Container Recycling Rate = Tons of RPPCs RecycledTons of RPPCs Generated (Recycling tons sources: CIWMB’s 2001 Processor Survey, and DOC’s recycled tons of CRV + Non-CRV)

  4. 2001 Adjustment for Yield Loss, using factors developed by Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc.

  5. (2001 CA Pop / 2001 US Pop) (1999 CA Pop / 1999 US Pop) 2001 Nat’l Sales 1999 Nat’l Sales 2001 All-ContainerRecycling Rate Tons of RPPCs Generated in 2001 = (XYZ)  100 where: X = Y = Z = (1999 Recycled + 1999 Disposed)

  6. X = (Recycled + Disposed) Recycling Data Source: • CIWMB Annual Processors Survey • Department of Conservation’s Annual Report Disposal Data Source: • CIWMB’s Annual Disposal Report • Waste Characterization Study (95, 99, 03/04)

  7. (2001 CA Pop / 2001 US Pop) (1999 CA Pop / 1999 US Pop) Y = Population Ratio Data Source: • The U.S. Census Bureau and the • California Department of Finance Data used 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000 and 2001 Data available in April

  8. 2001 Nat’l Sales 1999 Nat’l Sales Z = National Resin Sales Data Source: • Society of Plastics Industry (Data used for 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999) • American Plastics Council (Data available annually in April) (Data used for 2000 and 2001: *Includes Canada + US) PET Resin Sales Data Source: • Department of Conservation (Data used for 1995, 1996 and 1997)

  9. 2001 Nat’l Sales 1999 Nat’l Sales Z = continued PET Resin Sales Data Source (continued): • Modern Plastics Publication (Data used for 1995, 1996, 1997 and 2000) • Society of Plastics Industry (Data used for 1998 and 1999) • American Plastics Council (Data used for 2000: *Canada + US) • Nat’l Assoc.of PET Cont. Resources (NAPCOR) (Data used for 2001 and *Data Available in September)

  10. Background Data for Calculations:National Resin Sales-EXAMPLE Source: American Plastics Council

  11. Year Total All Container Recycling Rates Processor Survey Response Rates 1995 82,000 tons 24.6% Best Rate, 23.3% low, 25.9% high 84.3% 1996 78,745 tons 23.2% Best Rate (no ranges) 99.6% 1997 78,702 tons 21.9% Best Rate, 20.4% low, 23.5% high 100.0% 1998 82,683 tons 19.0% Best Rate, 18.1% low, 20.0% high 99.6% 1999 88,046 tons 17.9% Best Rate, 17.1% low, 18.8% high 99.6% 2000 102,024 tons 23.8% Best Rate, 22.7% low, 25.1% high 100.0% 2001 120,962 tons 26.1% Best Rate, 24.9% low, 27.5% high 100.0%

  12. 2001 Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Recycling Rate 2001 PET RPPC Tons Recycled 2001 PET RPPC Tons Sold (Recycling tons sources: CIWMB’s 2001 Processor Survey, and DOC’s recycled tons of CRV + Non-CRV)

  13. 2001 PET RPPCs Sold = (Tons of 2001 National PET bottle grade resin sales) x (California’s share of U.S. Population) x (0.99) (to account for 1% resin loss during manufacturing) (Source: National Association of PET Container Resources (NAPCOR), US Census Bureau, California Department of Finance )

  14. Year PET Total Tons Recycling Rates Processor Survey Response Rates 1995 37,550 tons 38.8 % 84.3% 1996 41,750 tons 35.9 % 99.6% 1997 45,694 tons 33.2 % 100.0% 1998 47,124 tons 28.5 % 99.6% 1999 49,799 tons 24.8 % 99.6% 2000 59,313 tons 36.1 % 100.0% 2001 72,418 tons 31.8 % 100.0% PET Recycling Trends:

  15. Recycling Rates

  16. CONCLUSION • “All Container” and PET Recycling rates are dependent on non-regulated RPPCs • Rates based on regulated RPPC containers would be very low • Data problem has been ongoing • Staff can not calculate accurate and timely rates under the current methodology • March 2004 Board Meeting, Workshop Feedback

  17. Recycling Rate Criteria • Develop a rate calculation methodology that meets the following criteria: 1. Based on independent sources of California specific data 2. Accurate, precise and independently verifiable, transparent 3. Reflects recycling of regulated containers 4. Cost effective

  18. Oregon’s Recycling Rate • Based on tons of Oregon’s RPPC disposed and recycled each year. • Waste Characterization Study every two years with outside funding • Survey of recyclers and processors for all materials, including RPPCs • Oregon’s RPPC definition differs from California’s. Example: floral pots

  19. Oregon’s Recycling RateCalculation Recycling Rate = _____Tons Recycled____ Tons Recycled + Tons Disposed (Sources: Staff Survey of Recyclers, WC Study every 2 years, and Oregon’s disposal tons).

  20. Wisconsin’s RPPC Program • Require 10% Post or pre-consumer, post industrial scrap • No Recycling rates calculated • No annual Certifications • No real ability to enforce RPPC law

More Related