200 likes | 309 Views
Rigid Plastic Packaging Container(RPPC) Recycling Rates Workshop February 5, 2004 9:00 am – 1:00 pm Cal/EPA 1001 “I” Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Sierra Hearing Room Contact: Sue Ingle 916-341-6511 or single@ciwmb.ca.gov. Use of Existing Methodology No Longer Feasible.
E N D
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
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
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)
2001 Adjustment for Yield Loss, using factors developed by Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc.
(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 = (XYZ) 100 where: X = Y = Z = (1999 Recycled + 1999 Disposed)
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)
(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
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)
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)
Background Data for Calculations:National Resin Sales-EXAMPLE Source: American Plastics Council
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%
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)
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 )
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:
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
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
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
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).
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