United States consumers traditionally have paid for trash collection through property taxes or as a fixed fee per household regardless of how much - or how little - they throw away. Environmental concerns, overflowing landfills, and the high cost of municipal waste management have caught up with a system that traditionally has put no limits on what consumers could toss. This has lent credibility to recycling - once the stepchild of the industry - and in turn the goal of increased recycling has lent credibility to programs that charge consumers to collect what doesn’t make it to the recycling bin.

By Penelope O’Malley

PAYT and Backyard Pickup
What’s Up Out West
Weight-Based Programs
Multifamily Innovations
Weight-Based Programs

Pay As You Throw (PAYT), as the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has dubbed the program, is gaining momentum throughout the US, but a quick survey of programs nationwide suggests that when it comes to the nuts and bolts of these systems - containers and collection - communities are not remaking the wheel. Some new directions are being suggested: automated equipment that will handle smaller containers, systems that service multifamily buildings, and equipment that will facilitate weight-based PAYT. But mostly solid waste managers are preoccupied with the challenges of drumming up community involvement and support. As one solid waste coordinator put it, the technical part isn’t rocket science.

Consultant Lisa Skumatz of Sera Inc., a Seattle, WA-based research and consulting firm specializing in what Skumatz prefers to call "variable rates," has been surveying PAYT programs every other year for the past 10 years. She reports that 34 states currently either mandate or encourage variable rates as a waste management option or provide education on variable rates at the state level. The number of systems in place has quadrupled in the time Skumatz has been keeping track - from 1,000 programs when the study was initiated to 4,400 in 1997. US communities that have adopted PAYT programs report reductions in waste disposal between 14 and 17% and corresponding increases in recycling of 32-59%.

In the volume-based systems, which so far are the preference in the US (Europe uses both volume- and weight-based programs), three types of container systems are typical: bags/tags/stickers (popular in the Midwest, Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and South Central states); carts/cans, either provided by the user, the municipality, or the hauler (Western and Southwestern states); and what Skumatz calls "customized hybrid systems" (seen most frequently in the Rocky Mountain states), which are modified PAYT programs combining a base service level at a set fee and bags or tagged containers.

As EPA suggests, the choices that communities make about containers go hand in hand with their rate structure. In some cases, the container the community opts for dictates the rate structure; in others, decision-makers develop a rate structure that lends itself to a certain type of container. The fact that many communities have adopted a "show me" attitude has reinforced the trend to be conservative in selecting containers and using the collection equipment at hand. In the least technically complicated approach - prepaid tags or stickers - residents use their own containers with tags or stickers they purchase from the solid waste agency, municipal offices, or retail stores.

Administrative and implementation costs are low, and although stickers have been known to be stolen or lost in bad weather, the major downside is that the system requires an enforcement program to ensure that residents correctly match stickers to containers. Input from the State of Illinois suggests that tags and stickers are simple for haulers because they don’t require additional curbside activities - that is, if stickers are conspicuously placed. Although stickers are often associated with rural communities where manual collection is more often the rule, some medium-size cites, such as Aurora, IL (100,000 residents), use sticker programs.

For some users, stickers also have an innate public relations appeal, as one resident in Durham, NC, observes. "Stickers are interesting because you can take a big bag left over from shopping at the store and put your garbage in it and put a sticker on it. Then you are reusing that bag and not generating another waste product."

One step up from stickers and tags are plastic bags, which offer some of the convenience of cans without the expense. Communities using prepaid bags typically sell distinctively marked, standard-size trash bags - usually 20 or 30 gal. - at the solid waste agency, municipal offices, or retail stores. Bags create a strong incentive to reduce waste: Residents can’t fail to notice the connection between how many bags they set out at the curb and what they’re charged in their monthly bill. Implementation and administration are easier, although PAYT bags are no more immune to pests than regular garbage bags are.

From bags, the jump is to cans or carts, either provided by residents or supplied by the municipality or hauler. In communities that opt for hard-surface containers over bags, consumers are typically offered a choice of graduated-size containers from 10 to 90 gal. (EPA says 30- to 60-gal. carts are the most common.) Residents choose the size they think they will use and are billed for that level of service. Alternately, collection crews can record the number of cans the customer leaves at the curb. Variable can or cart service produces greater revenue, but some communities think it doesn’t provide as great an incentive to recycle, in part because the user is billed the same amount whether the cart or can is full or not. Where residents don’t supply their own, there are administrative costs associated with container inventorying and distribution.

Anticipating the size of containers residents will chose has also been a problem in municipalities that opt to supply customers with containers. "Do not underestimate how many people will select the smallest container," caution waste management officials in Austin, TX. "Right off the bat, we went $2,100 in the hole because of all the people who were going to do the ‘right thing’ and pick 30-gallon carts. In other words, be prepared for your program to become successful." Other communities have had difficulties with customers switching levels of service. Austin offers a free cart exchange for the first switch and charges $15 per change thereafter. Pasadena, CA, has a rule that customers can’t change service levels more often than once every six months. Although the city currently doesn’t charge for changes, it anticipates adding a $15-$25 surcharge for capricious customers.

Communities that have used large containers prior to implementing PAYT face a different problem. Skumatz suggests that if small-enough containers are not available for customers to select, this can reduce the incentive to cut down on solid waste disposal and threaten the dual goals of reducing the wastestream and increasing recycling. For customers who opt for smaller containers, there is also the issue of compatibility with automated or semiautomated collection systems. "Some automated collection arms can fit containers as small as 35 gallons," Skumatz states, "but most grippers work best with containers that are 60 or more gallons. In addition, because tipping arms grab at a certain height, the smaller containers are often relatively tall and narrow." This means they’re susceptible to being tossed around in bad weather.

In a pilot test for the state of Wyoming, Skumatz suggested three possible alternatives for communities stuck with carts too large to produce what she considers meaningful recycling incentives. These include utilizing inserts that allow customers to continue to use the larger cans but not fill them completely, and decreasing can capacity with such materials as expandable insulating foam. Additional options include requiring residents to purchase their own containers to conform to the level of service they’ve opted for and reducing collection frequency - that is, waiting until the can is full before putting it out for pickup.

Skumatz reports that inserts are available from three suppliers: Otto Industries, which makes inserts that convert 68-gal. carts to 35 gal. and 32-gal. cans into 20 gal. by means of four pop rivets; Urban Systems/Zarn, whose insert also snaps in place with rivets to convert 60-gal. carts to 30 gal. and 30-gal. carts to 15 gal.; and Toter, whose inserts convert 32-gal. carts to 20 gal., again with four rivets. Inserts and alternative pickup schedules are Skumatz’s preferred options for communities stuck with oversized containers. She also suggests several strategies for implementing variable collection schedules - automated pickup using radio-frequency tags (costs to retrofit trucks and containers must be factored into the decision-making); manual recording, which eliminates the cost and hassle of installing chips, antennas, and onboard computers; and committing the customer to a regular pickup based on need.

PAYT and Backyard Pickup

All these factors considered, what do things look like on the street? A quick tour of the US suggests a variety of approaches to reduce solid waste and increase recycling but only little area-by-area consistency. Athens–Clarke County, GA, began a PAYT program after the City of Athens merged with Clarke County to form a unified government. A citizen task force was charged with investigating the issue of solid waste management for the new municipality.

As part of this effort, the group of 15 environmentalists, waste handlers, and recycling entrepreneurs spent a year exploring various recycling and solid waste alternatives. One of the group’s first recommendations was to hire a recycling coordinator, one of only five in the state, whose immediate job was to investigate the waste management strategies of other environmentally responsible cities. The district finally settled on a volume-based program, and a consultant suggested the municipality construct a materials recovery facility (MRF) to accommodate the recycling segment of its waste management program. (The MRF was built by a private contractor who manages the facility under municipal oversight.)

The City of Athens does its own collection of garbage and recyclables, although private haulers continue to operate in previously unincorporated county areas. City collection is what the staff calls "80% manual." Crews remove solid waste from backyard cans, but recycling bins (two 18-gal. carts: green for bottles and cans, blue for paper) are emptied at curbside. Previously, collection crews carried the garbage from backyard to truck, but recently the city equipped them with 90-gal. roll carts. Trucks are semiautomated rearloaders. For garbage, residents use individual or multiple 20- or 32-gal. containers (the maximum allowable is five of the 32-gal. size), which they purchase themselves. Service for one 20-gal. can is $12 a month and $13 for a 32-gal. can. Two 32-gal. cans are $16, three are $22, four are $30, and five are $42. All levels of service are for weekly pickup.

The city’s latest data, as of January 1999, show 687 households using one 20-gal. can, 3,000 using one 32-gal. can, and 4,765 using two 32-gal. cans. Only 95 households use three 32-gal. containers, 95 use four, and one customer has held out for the maximum of five cans. "We found that most of our customers don’t regularly fill the two 32-gallon cans," says Sharyn Dickerson, assistant solid waste manager and waste-reduction manager. "They keep the two-can service as security. They pay the same whether they fill the can or not."

Why the multiple-can system? Before Athens went to PAYT, residents were already using 32-gal. containers for their backyard pickup. "There was no need to provide a 64-gallon can when we had customers using less than the capacity of their two 32-gallon cans," Dickerson points out. "And there was no need to buy carts if we were going to keep backyard collection - we didn’t need to make the carts look nice and uniform because the containers were going to stay behind the houses. And if we didn’t require a new can size, we didn’t have the problem of disposing of the containers residents already had or how we were going to pay for new ones."

The city also collects commercial waste within its jurisdiction, servicing commercial Dumpsters and front-end boxes. For collection in the downtown area, it uses plastic bags. Downtown customers not on commercial collection pay a monthly fee according to the collection schedule they select, which ranges from twice a week to three times a day Monday through Saturday and twice on Sunday. The plastic bags are purchased in bulk for $1 each. Bag pickup is at the curb. "The $1 is tied to the cost of disposing of the trash in the bags," says Dickerson, who emphasizes that PAYT in Athens is not subsidized by the city.

Recyclables are collected on a second pass after the garbage, using the same crew. One truck picks up bottles and cans and glass, followed by another truck that picks up paper. Most downtown residents live in lofts; residents in multifamily buildings use eight recycling drop-off sites placed around town at shopping centers and supermarkets. Three apartment houses have their own recycling receptacles, which are similar to the boxes at drop-off sites - 30-yd.³ enclosed containers, one for paper and one for bottles and cans. Drop-off sites are serviced daily.

Using these various strategies, Athens has produced a 40% reduction in residential trash during the five years the program has been in place. What’s ahead? Dickerson says Athens will be reviewing the logistics of continuing backyard pickup and looking at co-collection of garbage and recycling in the same vehicles to reduce wear and tear on trucks and people and to reduce traffic. In the recycling area, the staff continues to look for opportunities for materials that can be recycled, such as ink-jet and laser cartridges, and will follow EPA’s lead in recycling TV sets and other electronic equipment.

What’s Up Out West

Across the continent in another Clark County, garbage collection in the city of Vancouver, WA (69,000 residents), has been a contracted service since 1937. In 1989, the State of Washington passed the Waste Not Washington Act, which required cities and counties to implement programs aimed at reaching the statewide goal of 50% waste reduction and recycling by 1995. To reduce reliance on landfill disposal and meet local and statewide goals, Vancouver adopted a PAYT philosophy. Residents opted for the level of service they thought they’d use and either provide their own cans or use a container supplied by the contract hauler.

In 1990, in the first step toward PAYT, the city council introduced linear rates for trash collection, approving a rate increase that made the cost of a second can 84% greater than the first. The city reports that as a result of this economic incentive, after 15 months there was a 13% increase in the number of customers choosing the one-can basic service and a corresponding decrease in customers choosing two-can service. Two years later, the city implemented a weekly mini-can option, and within five months nearly 500 residents had switched to a 20-gal. container.

By the end of the following year, this number had doubled. The city was also receiving numerous customer requests for more service choices, which resulted in three new residential-garbage service level options: every-other-week collection using the 32-gal. can, every-other-week using the mini-can, and monthly 32-gal.–can service. The same year, in cooperation with Clark County, the city implemented a curbside recycling program. The program is mandatory for single-family households, and all households are billed $3.10 per month for weekly recycling as part of their garbage service. A similar program is also available to all multifamily complexes within the city limits.

The city’s contract hauler also offers a voluntary yard-debris collection program. For a monthly fee ($5.55), customers can set at the curb up to 96 gal. of material. Since the program is voluntary, it does not conflict with citizens who choose to compost their organic wastes at home or self-haul to local composting facilities.

In spite of the program’s success, there have been challenges. "We’re not automated," says solid waste specialist Elise Deatherage, "so customers have the option of using any 32- or 20-gallon can they like. One problem we’ve had is residents who buy their cans at a local hardware or discount store and end up with the wrong size. They usually discover this the first time they set it out, when the hauler won’t take the can." Nor were new residents, who were annexed to the city after PAYT was implemented, happy about their rates for trash collection. Accustomed to a small $2.50 jump from one to two cans, they were faced with paying double their usual one-can rate. Additionally, Vancouver uses a stacking container for recycling - one bin for plastic; one for glass, aluminum, and tin; and one for fiberboard - and Deatherage says she’d rather have a roll cart to help keep blowing paper and crushed milk cartons off the street. "The decision was probably made on what was available at the time," says Deatherage. "Now it’s costly to switch."

Despite these glitches, Vancouver says it has found its volume-based system an effective tool for encouraging residents and businesses to examine their disposal habits, recycle more, and decrease garbage-service levels. The city exceeded its 50% recycling goal by the end of 1995; 51% of the city’s waste was recycled, and 49% was disposed of in the landfill that year. The data suggest, however, that having a variety of service options, although positive from a waste-reduction and customer standpoint, increases the instability of the revenue stream for service providers and makes enforcement of mandatory collection more difficult.

In contrast, Olympia, WA - the state capital - has been operating a PAYT program for so long, it’s currently considering revamping its rates and service for a second time. "We do everything in the city except commercial recycling," says Penny Mabie, solid waste program specialist. "In 1998 we were looking at three very serious problems and decided to make some improvements. One was that our rates weren’t covering the cost of the programs. We weren’t able to expand our recycling program very effectively because our equipment was old and limited, and we were getting a lot of driver injuries associated with manual collection. Our manual-collection residential recycling program was really tough on the collectors because we had a hybrid cart, which was really nothing more than an old 45-gallon garbage can that we had equipped with three different inserts to hold different recyclable materials. The drivers had to pull up to the cart, take off the lid, then pull those pods manually. We were getting a lot of repetitive stress injuries, and these were becoming more serious as time went on."

At that time the city was offering weekly collection of garbage and weekly collection of recyclables using frontloading manual collection on the garbage trucks and the old recycling trucks. Residents paid a standard one-, two-, or three-can rate, and the city offered a special rate for residents who used one 10-gal. mini-can. After reviewing its problems, Olympia moved to semiautomated collection for both residential garbage and recycling, using one vehicle to collect both. "We stayed with front load, but we went with a split-pack frontload vehicle and put all our customers on an alternate-week collection schedule," Mabie explains. "One week we take the trucks out and collect garbage. The next week we take the same trucks out and collect recycling."

The biggest challenge in the new system turned out to be containers. For every-other-week collection, the former 10-gal.-can customers needed a 20-gal. cart, which isn’t available. The city solved the problem by using inserts. They bought 35-gal. carts and installed 20-gal. inserts so customers can now choose between 20-, 35-, and 65-gal. carts for their every-other-week garbage service. Decals were applied to the converted 20-gal. carts, identifying users as "Another waste-wise customer" to acknowledge the effort made by 20-gal. residents. "We didn’t want to diminish the pride the former 10-gallon customers had in putting out that little can at the curb every week," says Mabie. Totals for a recent month break down as follows: 1,642 customers used the 20-gal. can ($4.60 a month), 1,558 used the 35-gal. can ($7.95 a month if the customer subscribes to recycling, $2 more if they don’t), and 7,459 used the 65-gal. cart ($10.85 a month with recycling and $13.65 without). There are still 41 customers who’ve opted to pay for weekly pickup ($17.50 a month).

Recycling carts are 65 gal., vertically split down the middle. Fibers are placed in one side, and all bottles and cans and rigid containers are on the other side. Collection vehicles are also vertically split, with a two-part front bucket and a hopper that keeps materials separate. Yardwaste pickup is by subscription, collected in a 95-gal. cart, or residents can take advantage of the city drop-off facility, open one day a week, or the full-service compost facility at the county landfill.

Mabie remarks that the only thing she’d consider doing differently is going straight from manual to automated collection. The decision for a semiautomated system was based on an assessment that some of the streets in the old section of the city weren’t wide enough to accommodate automated trucks. But Mabie says she’s discovered that automated collection was possible in more of the city than she originally forecasted. "We have our trucks on a five-year purchase schedule so we won’t be locked into any one system for 10 or 12 years. The carts that we bought are universal carts, so we’re already set up to go fully automated. The productivity gains of going fully automated are pretty dramatic. We discovered that going from manual to semiautomated actually slowed us down. If you go straight to fully automated, it’s quicker because the can is placed there for you."

Olympia also provides recycling cans for multifamily homes, but instead of split containers, there are two 95-gal. cans: one for paper and the other for plastic bottles, tin and aluminum cans, glass bottles, aerosol cans, aluminum foil, milk jugs, and drink boxes. Over 80% of multifamily facilities participate in the recycling program.

Clean Streets

Gainesville, FL, is a suburban community of just over 100,000 residents, the largest city in Alachua County. The city began its cart-based PAYT program in July 1994, when it entered into a contract with Waste Management of Central Florida Inc. to collect residential solid waste and commingled recyclables and another contract with Boone Waste Industries Inc. for the collection of yardwaste. In 1990 the state set a four-year waste-reduction goal of 30%. Gainesville and the county followed suit, upping the ante to 50% reduction by 2001.

The city’s new contract for solid waste service included variable rates for residential collections - $13.50, $15.96, or $19.75 per month for one 35-, 64-, or 96-gal. container, respectively. Recycling and yardwaste service in the city is unlimited. The city has had curbside collection of recyclables since 1989. With the introduction of the new contracts, collection was increased from once every other week to once a week, a choice that Recycling Coordinator Gina Hawkins says made it possible to implement the PAYT system without the use of bags or tags. An additional benefit is what Hawkins calls "clean streets six days a week." At the time of the new collection contracts, the city also added brown paper bags, corrugated cardboard, and phone books to its recycling program.

In the first year of the PAYT program, the amount of solid waste collected decreased 18%, and the recyclables recovered increased 25%. The city now reports 95% resident participation in the recycling program. Total disposal tonnage has decreased from 22,120 to 18,116, resulting in a savings of $186,200 to the residential sector, or $7.95 per household.

Both Gainesville and Alachua County use an enterprise fund to pay for solid waste management. Residents in the city pay their monthly service fee on their utility bill; county residents pay an annual assessment for the service. Furthermore, residents of both areas, as well as commercial property owners, pay an assessment to cover costs not directly associated with solid waste collection and disposal. "Planning ahead was critical to the success of Gainesville’s program," says Hawkins. "It was crucial for us to order our carts and public-outreach publications far in advance of program implementation."

Multifamily Innovations

To help solve the sticky problem of recycling and PAYT in multifamily buildings, Hi-Rise Recycling Systems Inc. in Miami, FL, has developed two systems adaptable for buildings with centralized solid waste chutes. One is a tri-sorter: a compactor for garbage and two 90-gal. drums for recycling. The compactor will compact into any capacity container so it can be picked up by a frontloader. The other system is Hi-Rise’s turntable model, available with four to 10 bins. The lazy Susan–like device is activated by the customer who uses a keypad installed on each floor. The latter idea originated in New York City, where it’s heavily used. (Florida building owners prefer the tri-sorter system.) According to Skumatz, Hi-Rise has installed its system in 200 buildings, either new or retrofitted. The company lists 65 distributors nationwide.

Weight-Based Programs

While volume-based programs are the norm in the US, weight-based systems are in use in Europe, and Skumatz reports that the technology is becoming available for the US market, from both European and US manufacturers. The challenge for municipal managers interested in weight-based systems is measuring their customers’ waste to generate accurate billing. For equipment suppliers, the challenge has been to design fast and accurate scale systems that can be used with collection vehicles.

Skumatz reports that most preliminary testing of weighing systems is focused on modifying semi- or fully automated tipping mechanisms, reflecting a trend toward automation to increase efficiency and reduce costs (and thus user rates). Part of the problem is that the equipment developed for US use must be certified to conform to the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Class III level. Cardinal Scale’s On Board Environmental Scale has received National Type Evaluation Program certification for a static system. It involves retrofitting semiautomated tipping arms and operationally requires a stop in the cycle to determine the weight, which results in six to 10 seconds being added to the cycle time. Toter has passed key phases of testing for a dynamic system, Skumatz reports, but so far nothing has yet been certified for fully automatic weight systems.

No doubt this is in the works. Based on communities with established programs and those that have experimented and sorted out the factors that make a program successful, automated collection, even in smaller communities, seems likely to become more widespread along with the implementation of weight-based systems. That’s not to say that PAYT is likely to be a walk in the park everywhere it’s considered. "You can never underestimate the difficulty of changing people’s way of doing things," comments Howard Weinerman, a solid waste consultant who has helped implement PAYT programs throughout Ohio.

Many of the communities Weinerman has been involved with have not previously had MSW collection, and in such situations experience suggests that the best way to introduce PAYT is with bags, in part because of their minimal start-up costs. "I don’t see bags being a problem in any of the smaller or more rural areas," he states. "And the bag systems are easier. My push has always been to start with the bag system when you’re converting from a primitive solid waste system, and then move on to subscription-based options for trash cans." Weinerman also points out, however, that one of the downsides is that it might require an "enormous amount of time" to explain to people why they have to pay for bags when they might have a perfectly usable trash can out back.

"Occasionally we get solicited by a service director who is fully supportive. But we almost always end up looking for an inexpensive way to start up. Most of the time when we implement these programs, I have no confidence that the city leaders really believe this is going to work. Of course it’s so simple, it does work."

A coda to Weinerman’s remark comes from Susan Young, director of solid waste and recycling for Minneapolis, MN, who has doubts about variable rates in what she calls "urban core cities." "We have 54 languages in Minneapolis, and 48% of my customers are in rental units and never see the bill." Mandated by the state to implement a PAYT program, Minneapolis offers two cart sizes: 20 and 94 gal. Young says out of 180,000 customers, only 2,500 have opted for the smaller cart. "We had a mature recycling program, a mature yardwaste-separation program, and a mature appliance-collection program in Minneapolis. We have 91% participation in our recycling program. Our customers make 11 separations at the curb. I can see that Pay As You Throw would be a phenomenal educational tool in a community where you were starting up one of these systems."

MSW
July/August 2000