Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
NO: R200 COUNCIL DATE: November 2, 2009
REGULAR COUNCIL TO: Mayor & Council DATE: October 29, 2009 FROM: General Manager, Engineering FILE:
XC: 0450-20 (SWMP) 5360-19
SUBJECT:
Status Report on the Updating of the Regional Solid Waste Management Plan
(SWMP) and on Metro Vancouver’s Landfill Replacement Strategy
RECOMMENDATION The Engineering Department recommends that Council receive this report as information. INTENT The intent of this report provides information about the process being followed by Metro Vancouver in updating the Regional Solid Waste Management Plan and about the strategy that is being pursued in relation to the replacement of the Cache Creek Landfill, which currently accepts solid waste from the Metro Vancouver Region. BACKGROUND Metro Vancouver (MV) provides waste disposal service to the region and, along with its member Municipalities, works to develop policies and plans for the management of municipal solid waste in the region. MV is in the process of updating the regional Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP). The plan is one of a series of plans based on the principles outlined in the MV Sustainability Framework (Appendix I). The SWMP is also based on the provincial waste management hierarchical five-step approach commonly referred to as the five R’s with reduction of waste at the top of preferred approaches followed by reuse and recycling which are waste diversion strategies. The last two steps in the hierarchy are recovery and residual management. These last two steps are the strategies used to address the waste remaining after all practical efforts to avoid, reduce, reuse, and recycle the waste have been exhausted.
DISCUSSION
Earlier in 2009, MV confirmed the regional commitment to increase waste diversion in the region from the current rate of 55% to 70% by 2015 through the aggressive application of the strategies and actions of the Zero Waste Challenge and through the recovery of materials and energy from the waste that remains. The relevant MV discussion document which encapsulates these elements is attached as Appendix II. The document presents key issues, opportunities, and
- 2 - actions to improve upon the existing approaches. In addition, this document formed the basis of an extensive consultation process by MV over the course of the spring of 2009. The consultation process involved residents, municipal elected officials and staff, First Nations, business representatives, and interest groups.
Organics Diversion As a component of the SWMP and to increase waste diversion, MV announced in June 2009 that it had partnered with Fraser Richmond Soil and Fibre for the provision of the first regional organics facility. In addition, the City of Surrey is exploring a partnership with Metro Vancouver to establish the first regional bio-fuel facility in Surrey. Most MV municipalities are currently reviewing their waste collection contract requirements with a view to deploying a full organics curbside collection program as soon as practical. It is expected that the above efforts, along with MV managed commercial recycling and organics waste diversion initiatives, will drive the region’s waste diversion to the 70% goal by 2015. A separate Corporate Report (Curbside Residential Organics Collection Service – Proposed Public Consultation and Pilot Collection Program) on this topic is on the same agenda as this report for Council consideration. Management of Residual Waste (the remaining 30%) Metro Vancouver requires replacement capacity for Cache Creek Landfill both as a means for interim disposal of waste and for long-term waste residual management. As part of this, MV is considering the establishment of waste-to-energy facilities. To this end, MV had retained the services of AECOM Consulting Ltd. to rigorously establish the pros/cons of a variety of alternatives, including waste-to-energy, to manage the region’s residual waste. The findings of the AECOM report, which assessed all options (including landfilling), are that an increasing emphasis on waste-to-energy is the superior option (against all other alternatives) in terms of air emissions, energy generation and costs. While waste-to-energy facilities are being considered, it will be a number of years to design, construct and commission such facilities. Due to the impending closure of the Cache Creek Landfill in 2010, an interim solution to the disposal of the region’s waste will still be necessary. In this regard, the use of the Vancouver Landfill has been considered; however, it would require the support of the City of Vancouver, Delta and the Ministry of Environment, which, at this time, appears highly unlikely. Metro Vancouver, as part of a Request for Proposals process in 2006, received several private landfill proposals including one in Washington State. As a result, and further to a series of public consultations, MV had announced earlier in 2009 that it intended to transport a portion of the region’s waste to Washington State on an interim basis while the region continues to plan the establishment of waste-to-energy facilities. As of late August 2009, these plans have been placed on hold due to the Provincial Government announcing as part of the Throne Speech that the Provincial Government would not support the exporting of the region’s waste to Washington State. MV staff is now working with Provincial officials to determine an appropriate alternative. In an effort to expedite the establishment of waste-to-energy facilities within the region, MV hosted a series of public forums (involving a panel discussion and a question and answer period at each forum) in mid-September 2009, the objective of which was to present and discuss the options for managing the waste that remains after all steps to reduce, reuse and recycle have been exhausted.
- 3 - These forums were well attended by the public. However the feedback received by MV was not entirely positive. Highlights and concerns voiced during the discussions included the following:
Perceived lack of balance amongst the panellists with respect to the waste-to-energy issue (the panellists were perceived by the public as being “pro waste-to-energy”);
Greater emphasis needed on increasing recycling rates and reducing waste;
Waste-to-energy emphasis could discourage increased efforts in waste reduction;
Health implications;
Effects of emissions from incineration on agriculture;
Climate change implications; and
Management of the ash from incineration.
In addition to the above, it was apparent that the public is generally unaware that Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities are working towards an amendment to the SWMP. As a result of the above, MV’s Waste Management Committee endorsed a Draft Solid Waste Management Plan Communications Framework. The main elements of the communications framework are:
Face-to-face presentations with key stakeholders;
A dialogue or forum series on waste management;
Website and social media outreach;
Media relations; and
Advertising and outreach regarding the public consultations.
By way of the above-listed efforts, MV anticipates that it will gain greater public support and consensus in relation to its goals to manage residual waste via waste-to-energy facilities as well as to establish a greater understanding of the region’s direction with respect to waste diversion goals and strategies. Waste Disposal Fee Increases In October 2009, MV announced that it will increase the regional garbage disposal rate (i.e., the “tipping fee”) from $71/tonne to $82/tonne effective January 1, 2010. In addition, MV announced that the disposal rate would increase annually and peak in 2014 at $130 /tonne. MV has indicated that these increases are necessary due to an overall reduction to waste tonnages in the region which has impacted the overall revenues derived to offset operating costs as well as the higher costs associated with educating the public and promoting waste diversion with the objective of achieving the 70% diversion target by 2015. The impact of the increased ($82/tonne) rate to Surrey will be an increase of approximately $700,000 in the waste disposal budget, which will require an increase in the garbage collection rate charged to homeowners.
- 4 - CONCLUSION
Metro Vancouver is presently working on amendment to the Regional Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP). The Zero Waste Challenge, which forms a part of the SWMP, targets an increase in waste diversion throughout the region from the present rate of 55% to 70% by the year 2015. Metro Vancouver is exploring a number of strategies to achieve this and other goals outlined in their draft SWMP as well as the impending issues that the region is facing with respect to closure of the Cache Creek Landfill in 2010. Vincent Lalonde, P.Eng. General Manager, Engineering VL/RAC/brb Appendix I: Metro Vancouver Sustainability Framework Appendix II: Metro Vancouver Discussion Document on the Zero Waste Challenge – Goals,
Strategies and Actions g:\wp-docs\2009\administration\cr\10271415rac.doc J14 10/30/09 1:47 PM
APPENDIX I
Metro Vancouver Sustainability Framework
Goals, Strategies, and Actions
Zero Waste Challenge
www.metrovancouver.org
PRINTED IN CANADA ON RECYCLED PAPER
3
Vision StatementSustainable Region Initiative
Metro Vancouver has a vision to achieve what humanity aspires to on a global basis – the highest quality of life embracing cultural vitality, economic prosperity, social justice and compassion, all nurtured in and by a beautiful and healthy natural environment.
We will achieve this vision by embracing and applying the principles of sustainability, not least of which is an unshakeable commitment to the well-being of current and future generations and the health of our planet, in everything we do.
As we share our efforts in achieving this vision, we are confident that the inspiration and mutual learning we gain will become vital ingredients in our hopes for a sustainable common future.
Table of Contents
A. Zero Waste Challenge 6
B. Waste Reduction Current Status 7
C. Moving Beyond 55% 10
D. Goals, Strategies, Actions and Measures 11
Goal 1: Minimize Waste Generation 11
Goal 2: Maximize reuse, recycling and material/energy recovery 12
E. The Cost of Getting to 70% 13
F. Beyond 70% 14
G. Conclusion 15
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 16
Appendix 2a 17
Appendix 2b 18
Appendix 2c 20
Appendix 2d 21
Appendix 2e 22
Appendix 3 23
Appendix 4 30
6
Metro Vancouver is committed to achieving a sustainable future for the region. The Sustainability Framework articulates this commitment and charts the course of action (Appendix 1). A key component of that commitment is the reduction and effective management of solid waste in our growing metropolitan area.
One mechanism in dealing with the garbage we collectively produce is the periodic development of Solid Waste Management Plans that set out the broad principles and specific actions that Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities will use in meeting shared responsibilities. Plan development is underway, and this discussion paper is intended to lay a foundation for public input to an initial set of goals, strategies and actions that will form the core of a new Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP).
Based on a hierarchy commonly referred to as the five Rs, with reduction of waste at the top of preferred approaches, followed by recycling and reuse, then recovery and the management of residuals, Metro Vancouver’s SWMP will set the course for waste management in the region for the future.
This initial phase of plan development and public discussion is focused on the first three of the five Rs – the reduce, recycle and reuse activities that allow us to divert waste from disposal. Those activities are embodied in Metro Vancouver’s Zero Waste Challenge – a concerted effort to focus on ways of reducing and diverting the amount of waste produced.
In adopting the Zero Waste Challenge as its priority, the region’s Board of Directors expressed a bold commitment to reduce solid waste in Metro Vancouver to the absolute minimum.
But the board also recognized that there are practical realities concerning how, and how long it will take, to reach that desired state of Zero Waste. As a result, it began a process of engaging the community in an examination of the challenges and opportunities that will contribute to realizing a truly Zero Waste region.
A series of public workshops were held to identify novel approaches to waste diversion, and participants in a recent Sustainability Summit were invited to set a vision for waste reduction and priority actions to achieve it. Municipal partners were consulted, and the diversion rates and practices of leading communities throughout North America and Europe were reviewed.
Arising from the wisdom gained in that engagement, the board identified an interim target of 70 % diversion from disposal as a signpost on the journey to Zero Waste. It instructed staff to propose ways in which current diversion rates might be increased (with the interim target as a starting point); to identify the implications of increasing diversion; and to actively pursue public input in refining the goals, strategies and actions necessary in accomplishing that increase. Responsible alternatives for managing the inevitable volumes of waste left over until Zero Waste can become a reality – the remaining two Rs – will form the second phase of plan development and public consultation later in 2009.
So where are we now, and where do we intend to go?
A. The Zero Waste Challenge
7
Although the Zero Waste Challenge was adopted only two years ago, Metro Vancouver and its member municipalities, many non-government organizations, and waste management and recycling businesses have been working hard to reduce waste in the region for several decades. As a result, the region has already made significant strides toward the zero waste goal.
Recycling programs – like the Blue Box – have existed in the region since as early as 1988. And in 1995, the region’s Solid Waste Management Plan set a target of diverting 50% of its waste from disposal by the year 2000.
This goal was met and exceeded in 1999 through a broad array of waste reduction programs. These have included residential recycling programs, municipal recycling depots, yard waste collection, disposal bans and private efforts in the commercial and institutional, and demolition and construction sectors. The result of these efforts is that in 2007, 55% of Metro Vancouver’s waste was diverted from disposal. Appendix 2 provides a list of diversion initiatives, as well as details of waste quantities, composition, and method of management.
B. Waste Reduction Current Status
!
8
The emphasis on recycling has been successful, with the volume of materials recycled increasing by about 70% over the last decade. However, during the same time period, a growing population and an upward trend in the amount of waste generated per person has caused the total volume of waste being generated to increase significantly. As a result, despite the continued increase in recycling volumes, the proportion of waste being diverted has remained close to 50% for nearly a decade, and the volume of waste needing to be disposed continues to climb. In terms of Metro Vancouver’s goal of achieving zero waste, the region has reached a plateau where just over half of its waste is diverted from disposal. This level represents a good step forward from the region’s performance during the early 1990s, but it needs to be improved upon in order to move closer to the Zero Waste target.
Moving beyond the 50% diversion level holds significant challenges.
First, of all, recycling alone cannot be the answer. To reduce the volumes needed to be disposed, the total amount of waste generated in the first place needs to come down. As long as total waste generation climbs in parallel with recycling volumes, we will not make progress toward Zero Waste. In other words, more improvement needs to be made in the first two Rs – reducing and reusing.
However, experience has shown that despite decades of public information on the need to reduce and reuse before one takes the step of recycling, our society tends to produce more, consume more and dispose more.
Without specific regulations by higher levels of government that require manufacturers, distributors and retailers to take greater responsibility for the lifecycle of the materials used in their products, a growing economy will continue to produce more waste that needs to be reused, recycled or sent for disposal.
Consumers have significant influence on manufacturers and suppliers through the purchasing choices they make. For instance, if consumers choose to purchase longer-lasting products, they not only reduce waste directly through that action, but they also reinforce the market signal to producers to shift their range of products towards more durable ones. This in turn influences other consumers to consider choosing
longer-lasting products, and so the trend towards such products (and therefore towards waste reduction) can snowball. Similarly, trends to reduce excess packaging or towards products that are inherently designed to be more recyclable can occur if there are strong consumer movements to initiate them.
The question becomes: how can public policy help foster the initiation and continuation of such movements in consumer choices? Education is critical, but efforts must go beyond basic awareness campaigns to embrace social marketing tactics that foster significant, lasting change. Consumers may also need incentives (financial and other) to do so.
Secondly, the recycling system faces a number of limitations that pose challenges for overall waste reduction. These limitations relate to market demand for recycled materials.
For recycling to work effectively, there must be adequate and sustainable markets for the materials. Recyclable materials are commodities that rise or fall in value; if values fall far enough, markets will collapse. Recent economic fluctuations have placed the viability of some material markets in jeopardy and reduced the overall demand for all recyclable commodities. In addition, the current dependence of the North American recycling system on foreign markets adds to its vulnerability.
Another limitation within the recycling system is rooted in the quality of materials captured. Some materials are considered waste and have no recycling value. A portion of recyclables is typically unmarketable due to contamination. Commingled collection systems and lack of knowledge or commitment by users can elevate levels of contamination. And, recycling operations themselves produce residual materials that require disposal.
9
Finally, it is a truism that the success of recycling and other diversion programs depends on the degree to which individuals participate in those recycling and diversion programs. The 70% target would be achieved if everybody recycles or diverts 70% of their waste, or if 70% of the population recycles or diverts absolutely all of their waste. But if 70% of the population recycles or diverts 70% of their waste, the overall recycling rate drops all the way back to below 50%. This is just simple arithmetic; but it is a powerful illustration that each new step toward the zero waste goal of having 100% of the population recycling 100% of the time will become increasingly difficult.
Solutions to these challenges will be multi-faceted. Demand for recycling markets may be increased by imposing “recycled content” regulations for manufactured goods. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs will put the onus on producers to find viable markets for their waste or alter their product or packaging to reduce waste. Business opportunities for recycling will also be created and supported by disposal bans. And effective education and community based social marketing programs can help to ensure higher recycling participation levels.
10
To take the next steps toward the Zero Waste goal, the region must take a series of deliberate steps to increase diversion rates beyond the current plateau of slightly over 50%. The rate at which we progress along the continuum towards Zero Waste is a focus of the Solid Waste Management Plan and the consultation on waste reduction initiatives. The remainder of this paper is a discussion of how the region could move beyond the 55% rate of diversion achieved in 2007.
In order to determine how to best progress toward Zero Waste, Metro Vancouver has studied successful examples of 3R initiatives – reduction, reuse and recycling – in other municipalities across North America and Europe, in addition to hosting workshops within the region to gather ideas from local sources. Actions that are predicted to have the highest potential for reducing waste in Metro Vancouver include:
• Addingfoodwastetoorganicscollection programs. Most Metro Vancouver municipalities collect yard trimmings from residents at the curb side. Adding food waste will increase diversion. Communities that have added food waste collection have found that many of the anticipated barriers turned out to be no problem in actual implementation. However, to increase organics diversion, processing infrastructure must be improved.
• Commercialstrategies.Workingwiththe commercial sector with tools such as regulations and user fees can provide significant opportunities for increases in diversion.
• Bans.Expandingthenumberofbanneditems and decreasing tolerances for the amounts of banned materials accepted in garbage should increase diversion by sending powerful signals to both consumers and producers to change behaviour.
• Educationandoutreach.Socialmarketing initiatives to further identify barriers to waste diversion and strategies to overcome such barriers will be needed to increase the success of many waste diversion efforts.
• Refinementstocurbsiderecyclingandcollection elements. Container size, collection frequency, and pay as you throw (PAYT - or User Pay) enhancements can provide powerful incentives to divert waste.
In order to set targets for waste reduction, it is helpful to consider the diversion rates achieved and projected by other jurisdictions. In 2007, Metro Vancouver commissioned a comparative study of waste management programs in jurisdictions across North America. Diversion rates ranged from 17% to 69%, with an average reported rate of 48%. However, the definition of diversion rates varies depending upon the composition of the waste that is reported.
The European Union has adopted new recycling targets. By 2020, member states must recycle 50% of their household, commercial and institutional waste and 70% of their construction and demolition waste. Member states must design and implement waste prevention programs for their countries which comply with the directive, and they are required to transpose the directive into national law within two years.
In 2007 the Netherlands, Germany and Belgium reported recycling rates of over 60% for household, commercial and institutional waste, but the average recycling rate was 39% for the 27 member states in that year.
C. Moving Beyond 55%
11
Goal 1: Minimize Waste GenerationStrategies:Advocate that senior governments transfer additional waste management responsibilities to producers and consumers.
Metro Vancouver will continue to work with senior levels of government to expand and improve Extended Producer Responsibility programs and will ensure that municipalities are involved and updated on new initiatives. A system of Eco-Centres will be established to provide convenient take back facilities.
Reduce or eliminate materials entering the solid waste system which hinder or limit opportunities to achieve reuse, recycling, or energy recovery, or that may exacerbate environmental impacts of disposed residuals.
Metro Vancouver will work with disposal facility operators to identify and remove specific waste streams and/or products that interfere with the facility’s ability to maintain high environmental standards or reduce the facility’s ability to optimize reuse, recycling or recovery activities.
Provide social marketing based information and education on purchasing options to reduce waste
A communication strategy will be developed by Metro Vancouver with input from municipalities and delivered by both regional and local governments. New communication and education activities targeting businesses and institutions will be added. This strategy will encourage businesses and individuals to adopt Zero Waste Challenge principles into their operations and daily life.
Existing staff will carry out much of the work on this strategy; however, in order to substantially broaden the reach and scope of information and education campaigns, including an intensive and long-term commitment to social marketing programs, Metro Vancouver will incur some costs for specific research and additional resources.
D. Goals Strategies and ActionsTwo goals have been identified under the Zero Waste Challenge framework:
1. Minimize waste generation
2. Maximize reuse, recycling and material/energy recovery
Each goal is supported by a comprehensive grouping of strategies, actions and implementation tasks. The detailed list of Strategies and Actions for Goals 1 and 2 are included in Appendix 4. A summary of the Goals and Strategies specifically relevant to the Zero Waste Challenge are provided below for discussion purposes.
12
Goal 2: Maximize Reuse, Recycling and Material/Energy RecoveryStrategies:Increase the opportunities for reuse
Metro Vancouver and municipalities will investigate the effectiveness and adequacy of existing exchange programs and the financial and regulatory barriers that prevent or discourage reuse.
Increase the effectiveness of existing recycling programs
This strategy aims to increase the incentives to utilize existing recycling programs through greater enforcement of material disposal bans, harmonized services between municipalities, improved recycling convenience by providing “one-stop drops,” and increased recycling opportunities at large events.
Facilitate increased private sector recycling
Local recycling businesses will be supported by addressing local opposition and assisting recyclers in the siting of their facilities. This will be done by changing regional and municipal bylaws and fostering community acceptance. Senior governments will be encouraged to examine policies that encourage the use of recycled material, such as the 40% post consumer recycled content requirements for newspapers in California.
Target demolition, land clearing and construction (DLC) sector for increased reuse and recycling
Metro Vancouver will work with municipalities to develop regional and municipal policies that promote minimizing and recycling waste at construction and demolition sites. In addition, support will be provided to facilities that recover, process and market useable materials.
Reduce paper and paperboard being disposed
Junk mail and other unwanted publications will be targeted for recycling, and food contaminated paper and paperboard for composting.
Target organics for recovery
Metro Vancouver will establish an organics processing facility suitable for managing waste food and municipal programs will be implemented to collect food waste from residents and businesses. Alternative uses for organics will continue to be investigated. Home and work place composting will continue to be encouraged.
Target plastics for increased recycling
Metro Vancouver staff will work with senior levels of government to increase Extended Producer Responsibility programs for plastic packaging in order to reduce the use of hard-to-recycle plastics and to increase recycling levels.
Target multi-family and industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) sectors to improve diversion rates
Metro Vancouver will work with municipalities to enact bylaws to require recycling in all multi-family and commercial buildings and complexes.
These goals, strategies and actions can be summarized into material categories and associated diversion potential, yielding an additional 18% diversion. The following table summarizes the diversion potential for each targeted material:
Disposed from all Sectors (tonnes)
DIversion Program Estimated Capture (tonnes)
Diversion Potential from Targeted Materials
Wood Waste 240,000 Modifications to Demolition and Building Permit Process 85,000 Provide Wood Drop Off Facilities at Transfer Stations 70,000 Paper and paperboard 305,000 Enhanced Disposal Bans 115,000 Composting 50,000 Food Waste 335,000 Composting 170,000 Plastic Waste 190,000 Expansion of Plastics Recycling 30,000 Yard Waste 85,000 Disposal Bans 60,000 E-Waste and Small Appliances 27,500 EPR - E-Waste 10,000 EPR - Small Appliances 10,000
Total 600,000
13
E. The Cost of Getting to 70%The Zero Waste Challenge strategies presented in this report have associated costs for both Metro Vancouver and municipalities. Full implementation of all of the action items could increase municipal costs for solid waste management by over $20 million, or an increase of about 20% over the current net municipal costs for solid waste.
Costs associated with reduction and reuse are difficult to quantify on a per tonne basis, but resources allocated in this analysis will also be partially offset by savings of both disposal and recycling costs.
14
The analysis of the feasibility of proposed actions outlined above is based on achieving a 70% diversion. To go beyond 70% will require further work to address the following barriers.
First, without intervention by governments, efforts to gain a competitive edge in the marketplace typically drive producers to create products at the lowest cost and with little regard to the waste they produce. This may result in excessive packaging, integration of many different materials into products so that recycling becomes virtually impossible, or the use of lower quality materials which result in shorter product life spans.
The primary factors that consumers consider in making purchasing decisions are cost and value. The environmental impact of products, including the amount of packaging, durability, and ease of recycling are often secondary issues or even overlooked entirely. What happens to the product at the end of its life is not typically considered when purchases are made.
Perhaps the most promising method of overcoming both of these barriers is to expand Extended Producer Responsibility programs, as identified in the second strategy noted above. To be truly effective, EPR programs must include incentives and requirements for both waste reduction and material recovery and be convenient for consumers to use. This can be achieved by requiring producers to focus on both product design and disposal. Without this focus EPR can simply be a transfer of cost for end-of-life management from the producer to the consumer in the form of higher purchase prices.
However, we live in a global economy with materials bought and sold around the world. The provincial influence upon producers in other countries is clearly limited and local producers and suppliers may have to compete for markets here and abroad with producers elsewhere with less restrictive regulations. In the pursuit of Zero Waste, therefore, Metro Vancouver will not only have to continue to advocate for other levels of government in Canada to implement new regulations, it may have to support similar efforts at the international level, while recognizing that the realities of a global economy may from time to time temper the extent and effectiveness of local Zero Waste Challenge programs, including EPR.
F. Beyond 70%
15
Clearly, the citizens and businesses of Metro Vancou-ver have achieved much in reducing waste, and our current rate of diversion of over 50 % compares fa-vourably with progressive metropolitan areas in North America and abroad.
But much of the ‘low hanging fruit’ in terms of reduc-tion, recycling and reuse has already been plucked. More participation in existing programs and the imple-mentation of additional regulatory, educational, and operational activities will result in some incremental gains, but it will become progressively more difficult as the diversion rate increases.
So, is 70 % a reasonable target for diversion in the near term? Is some other target, greater or smaller than that, more reasonable? How prepared are we, as a community, to accept the costs and lifestyle changes a truly Zero Waste region requires, and what will it take to change external factors – not the least of which is a market-based and consumer-driven global econo-my – that are beyond our direct influence?
Tackling these questions will help both in advancing the goals of the Zero Waste Challenge itself, and in understanding how we will address the final two Rs – the recovery of energy and useful materials and the management of residuals – that form the remainder of the waste management hierarchy and the second phase of SWMP development.
Metro Vancouver seeks to arrive at a public under-standing and informed agreement on the means by which we will work towards Zero Waste, and ensure the results are achievable within the context of the draft Solid Waste Management Plan.
G. Conclusion
Mandatory recycling at demolition and construction sites.
16
MEASURES & TARGETS(Sustainability Report)
REGIONAL VISION
METRO VANCOUVER ROLE & MISSION
VALUES
SUSTAINABILITY PRINCIPLES
SUITE OF PLANSSUSTAINABILITY IN ACTION
•Water
•Sewerage
•SolidWaste Disposal
•Parks
•Housing
•LabourRelations
COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE
Service Delivery
Plans, Policy & Regulations
Political Leadership
•DrinkingWater
•SolidWaste
•LiquidWaste
•AirQuality
•Growth Management
•Housing
•Parks&Greenway
•EcologicalHealth
•Outreach
•Advocacy
•Education
Appendix 1 Metro Vancouver Sustainability Framework
17
Appendix 2a
Current 3R initiatives
More than half of the total waste generated in Metro Vancouver is already diverted from disposal through residential recycling programs, municipal recycling depots, and private efforts in the commercial and de-molition/construction sectors. Existing waste diversion initiatives and Zero Waste Challenge actions include:
Residential recycling. -Combined, the Blue Box and apartment recycling pro-grams divert about 400,000 tonnes of materials from disposal each year.
Recycling for schools, businesses-About half of all municipalities have recycling collec-tion programs for schools and businesses.
Backyard composting -135,000 backyard composters have been distributed to Metro Vancouver residents. Composting food and yard waste can reduce household garbage by up to one third.
Yard Waste collection and drop off -Yard waste collection programs and drop off depots exist in most municipalities. 200,000 tonnes of organic material are diverted from landfill through these pro-grams. -Reduced drop-off fees for yard and garden waste (as compared to garbage) create an incentive to separate and compost.
Disposal Bans -A number of materials that can be recycled have been banned from landfill, including cardboard, newspaper, office paper, drywall, and car batteries. -Additional Bans were carried out in 2008 for comput-ers, desk-top printers and TVs, paints, solvents, gaso-line, pesticides and other household hazardous waste, yard trimmings, all blue box recyclables and refundable beverage containers, medication, tires, oil, oil filters and containers.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)-Provincial policies have been implemented that shift the responsibility for the entire lifecycle of certain wastes and packaging materials to the producer and away from local governments. EPR programs are now in place for beverage containers, car batteries, paints, solvents, flammable liquids, gasoline and pesticides, tires, and medication.-Electronic waste EPR was initiated in 2007 and the future inclusion of small appliances, CFL light bulbs and other mercury containing products was announced in 2008.
Food Waste Composting -A pilot project was successfully undertaken in early 2008 using GORE composting technology.-Contract negotiations are underway to establish a composting facility in Metro Vancouver that is ca-pable of composting food waste as well as yard and garden waste.
Recycling Pilot Projects-Metro Vancouver has initiated the following pilot programs to investigate and test new opportunities for waste reduction and recycling:•asphaltshinglerecyclingintopavingmixes.•eco-depot trial with a building supply company for the collection and recycling of renovation waste •multi-family recycling to identify the barriers to increased recycling in multi-family homes and com-plexes •reduction of waste from large public events and festivals
Education-Metro Vancouver and the municipalities deliver on-going education initiatives to raise awareness of the 5Rs, and encourage sustainable choices -Communication campaigns include •effortstoreduceChristmaswastein2007and2008•acommunity-basedsocialmarketingpilotprogramtargeted at increasing recycling rates in the multi-family housing sector; •pointofsalecampaignswithretailersaimedatap-propriate reuse or disposal of used computers and the safe disposal of unused medications, and •thelaunchofacomprehensiveweb-baseddata-base presenting, in a map format convenient for users, all of the reuse and recycling facilities in the region.
Concrete, Asphalt and Gypsum Recycling-Private businesses in Metro Vancouver recycle over 600,000 tonnes per year of concrete and asphalt recovered from demolition projects. -Each year over 100,000 tonnes of waste gypsum wallboard are recycled
18
Today, more than three and a half million tonnes of solid waste are generated annually in Metro Vancouver. The upward trend reflects a growing population and a decade of prosperity in the region.
The waste quantities in Metro Vancouver are increasing every year as the population ex-pands and particularly since 2003 when the economic fortunes of the region improved. Currently over three million tonnes of waste are generated annually in Metro Vancouver. Recycling quantities have been increasing steadily since the 1990s; however waste gen-eration has also been increasing. The figure above illustrates the trends in waste gen-eration, recycling and disposal and the effect of a growing population.
By 2030, Metro Vancouver’s population is predicted to exceed 3 million. With a ‘status quo’ approach to waste management, combined garbage and recycling volumes would increase from the current 3.6 million to 4.5 million tonnes per year.
Appendix 2b A growing population means more waste.
19
Per capita information shows that while individuals are recycling more, they are also generating more waste in the first place. As a result, despite the increased recycling efforts, the waste that needs to be disposed, per person, is still gradually rising.
!
20
Appendix 2cWhat is in our waste?
The pie chart on the top shows the overall composition of waste generated, including materials both disposed and recycled. The chart on the bottom shows the composition of waste currently being disposed in Metro Vancouver. Some of the materials entering the disposal stream are recyclable and can, with additional recovery efforts, be diverted through existing or new recycling programs. Other materials in the disposal stream do not have recycling value, but may have potential for recovery of energy.
The data presented here is from waste composition studies conducted by Metro Vancouver on the Residential and Industrial, Commercial and Institutional waste streams in 2007 and on the Demolition, Land Clearing and Construction waste stream in 2004.
Yard and Garden 2% Plastics 5%
Wood 7%
Paper and Paperboard 9%
Food 9%
Metals, glass, asphalt, others 13%
Recycled 55%
Metals, glass, asphalt, others 28% Yard and Garden 5%
Plastics 12%
Wood 15%
Paper and Paperboard 19%
Food 21%
21
!
Appendix 2dWaste composition varies by sector.
The amount and composition of waste disposed varies by community sector. The commercial sector (including institutions and light industry) produces the most waste, followed by the construction/demolition sector. In the residential sector, those living in single-family homes generate more than those living in multi-family residences. Self-haul, or material delivered to disposal facilities by individuals, is a growing category that comes primarily from single-family residents and, to a lesser extent, from the com-mercial and multi-family sectors.
22
Appendix 2eWhere does our waste go?
!
Just over half of our solid waste is diverted through recycling, extended producer re-sponsibility and composting initiatives. The remainder goes to energy recovery at the Metro Vancouver waste-to-energy facility in Burnaby or to landfill at the Vancouver Landfill, Cache Creek Landfill or private demolition and construction waste landfills.
23
Goa
l 1: M
inim
ize
Was
te G
ener
atio
nSt
rate
gy 1
.1: A
dvoc
ate
that
sen
ior g
over
nmen
ts tr
ansf
er a
dditi
onal
was
te m
anag
emen
t res
pons
ibili
ties
to p
rodu
cers
an
d co
nsum
ers.
Be
a st
rong
adv
ocat
e fo
r Ext
ende
d 1
Prod
ucer
Res
pons
ibili
ty (E
PR)
thro
ugh
activ
e m
embe
rshi
p on
st
ewar
dshi
p ad
viso
ry c
omm
ittee
s an
d pr
ovin
cial
and
nat
iona
l EPR
st
rate
gies
.
Con
tinue
par
ticip
atio
n on
Fed
eral
EP
R in
itiat
ives
e.g
. Can
adia
n 1.
1 C
ounc
il of
Min
ster
s of
Env
ironm
ent (
CC
ME
) Ext
ende
d P
rodu
cer
Res
pons
ibili
ty T
ask
Gro
up, t
o de
velo
p na
tiona
l gui
delin
es fo
r su
stai
nabl
e pa
ckag
ing.
Con
tinue
par
ticip
atio
n on
indu
stry
pro
duct
ste
war
dshi
p ad
viso
ry
1.2
com
mitt
ees,
e.g
. BC
Ele
ctro
nics
Ste
war
dshi
p A
dvis
ory
Com
mitt
ee, B
C T
ire S
tew
ards
hip
Adv
isor
y C
omm
ittee
, and
ot
hers
. W
ork
as a
mem
ber o
f the
new
ly-fo
rmed
BC
Pro
duct
Ste
war
dshi
p 1.
3 C
ounc
il to
pro
vide
feed
back
to th
e P
rovi
nce
on th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
of e
xist
ing
EP
R p
rogr
ams
and
assi
stin
g in
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f new
EP
R p
rogr
ams
Met
ro V
anco
uver
/ M
unic
ipal
ities
/ P
rovi
nce/
CC
ME
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
On-
goin
g
Part
ner w
ith M
inis
try
of
2 En
viro
nmen
t to
impl
emen
t EPR
pr
ogra
ms
Initi
ate
a fo
rmal
par
tner
ship
with
the
Min
istry
of E
nviro
nmen
t (M
OE
) 2.
1 to
acc
eler
ate
EP
R p
rogr
am d
evel
opm
ent a
nd im
plem
enta
tion.
C
ontin
gent
on
appr
oval
of a
form
al p
artn
ersh
ip, a
dd a
new
Met
ro
2.2
Vanc
ouve
r pos
ition
to b
e de
dica
ted
to th
is ta
sk.
Met
ro V
anco
uver
an
d M
OE
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
2010
Esta
blis
h a
syst
em o
f Eco
-Cen
tres
3
linke
d to
EPR
on
a vo
lunt
ary
mun
icip
al b
asis
.
Est
ablis
h a
wor
k gr
oup
to d
eter
min
e th
e te
rms
and
cond
ition
s fo
r 3.
1 pa
rtici
patin
g m
unic
ipal
ities
and
indu
strie
s.M
etro
Van
couv
er
and
mun
icip
aliti
esR
esid
entia
l an
d IC
I20
10
24
Stra
tegy
1.2
: Red
uce
or e
limin
ate
mat
eria
ls e
nter
ing
the
solid
was
te s
yste
m w
hich
hin
der o
r lim
it th
e op
port
uniti
es to
ac
hiev
e re
use,
recy
clin
g, o
r ene
rgy
reco
very
, or t
hat m
ay e
xace
rbat
e en
viro
nmen
tal i
mpa
cts
of d
ispo
sed
resi
dual
s.
Wor
k w
ith d
ispo
sal f
acili
ty
4 op
erat
ors
to p
reve
nt p
artic
ular
w
aste
mat
eria
ls fr
om a
ffect
ing
the
abili
ty o
f the
faci
lity
to m
aint
ain
high
env
ironm
enta
l sta
ndar
ds o
r to
opt
imiz
e re
use,
recy
clin
g or
re
cove
ry o
ppor
tuni
ties.
Det
erm
ine
the
impa
ct a
nd s
ourc
e of
the
was
te p
rodu
ct o
r was
te
4.1
stre
amD
eter
min
e th
e im
pact
and
feas
ibili
ty o
f ban
ning
the
was
te p
rodu
ct
4.2
or w
aste
stre
am fr
om th
e di
spos
al fa
cilit
y an
d th
e ot
her o
ptio
ns
avai
labl
e fo
r rec
yclin
g or
dis
posa
l.
Met
ro V
anco
uver
an
d m
unic
ipal
ities
All
Ong
oing
Stra
tegy
1.3
: Pro
vide
soc
ial m
arke
ting
base
d in
form
atio
n an
d ed
ucat
ion
on p
urch
asin
g op
tions
to re
duce
was
te.
Del
iver
a p
rogr
am to
info
rm a
nd
5 ed
ucat
e co
nsum
ers.
D
evel
op a
con
sum
er g
uide
to in
form
on
purc
hasi
ng a
nd o
ther
5.
1 re
duct
ion
activ
ities
.M
etro
Van
couv
erR
esid
entia
l20
10
Del
iver
a p
rogr
am to
info
rm a
nd
6 ed
ucat
e bu
sine
sses
.D
evel
op a
bus
ines
s gu
ide
to in
form
on
purc
hasi
ng a
nd o
ther
6.
1 re
duct
ion
activ
ities
.M
etro
Van
couv
erIC
I20
11
Enco
urag
e pe
rson
al a
nd c
orpo
rate
7
actio
n th
roug
h vo
lunt
ary
redu
ctio
n go
als
for i
ndiv
idua
ls,
fam
ilies
and
bus
ines
ses.
Dev
elop
an
d pu
blic
ize
prac
tical
met
hods
fo
r rea
chin
g th
ese
goal
s.
Pro
mot
e 70
% d
iver
sion
goa
l ove
r all
sect
ors-
feat
ure
in
7.1
com
mun
icat
ion
mat
eria
lsW
ork
with
mun
icip
aliti
es to
del
iver
redu
ctio
n go
als
thro
ugh
exis
ting
7.2
info
rmat
ion
chan
nels
with
resi
dent
sW
ork
with
and
thro
ugh
busi
ness
impr
ovem
ent a
ssoc
iatio
ns a
nd
7.3
sect
ors
to e
ncou
rage
cor
pora
te Z
ero
Was
te a
ctio
ns
Met
ro V
anco
uver
All
On-
goin
g
25
Goa
l 2: M
axim
ize
Reu
se, R
ecyc
ling
and
Mat
eria
l/Ene
rgy
Rec
over
y
Stra
tegy
2.1
: Inc
reas
e th
e op
port
uniti
es fo
r reu
se
Red
uce
the
impe
dim
ents
to re
use
8 In
vest
igat
e th
e fin
anci
al a
nd re
gula
tory
bar
riers
that
pre
vent
or
8.1
disc
oura
ge re
use.
Inve
stig
ate
the
effe
ctiv
enes
s an
d ad
equa
cy o
f exi
stin
g m
ater
ial
8.2
exch
ange
net
wor
ks.
Met
ro V
anco
uver
All
2011
Stra
tegy
2.2
: Inc
reas
e th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
of e
xist
ing
recy
clin
g pr
ogra
ms
Con
tinue
the
mon
itorin
g an
d 9
enfo
rcem
ent o
f the
dis
posa
l ban
sR
outin
ely
revi
ew a
nd re
port
on p
rogr
am re
sults
.9.
1 A
naly
se e
ffect
iven
ess
of d
ispo
sal b
ans
and
revi
ew a
ltern
ativ
e 9.
2 en
forc
emen
t mod
els.
E
xpan
d th
e m
ater
ial d
ispo
sal b
an p
rogr
am to
incl
ude
mat
eria
ls
9.3
incl
uded
in E
PR
pro
gram
s an
d m
ater
ials
for w
hich
new
recy
clin
g m
arke
ts a
re d
evel
oped
.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
All
Ong
oing
Info
rm b
usin
esse
s an
d re
side
nts
10
of re
cycl
ing
oppo
rtun
ities
Pro
vide
mun
icip
aliti
es w
ith th
e la
test
info
rmat
ion
on re
cycl
ing
10.1
co
llect
ion
and
drop
-off
faci
litie
s an
d si
gnifi
cant
cha
nges
to
polic
ies
and
faci
litie
s.C
ontin
ue a
nd u
pgra
de a
cen
tral p
hone
and
web
-bas
ed d
atab
ase
10.2
w
ith la
test
info
rmat
ion
whi
ch w
ill s
erve
as
a re
fere
nce
for t
he
publ
ic.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
Res
/ IC
IO
n-go
ing
Und
erta
ke a
bus
ines
s ca
se re
view
11
of
har
mon
izin
g th
e re
side
ntia
l and
IC
I was
te a
nd re
cycl
ing
colle
ctio
n le
vels
of s
ervi
ce o
ver t
he re
gion
so
that
ther
e is
con
sist
ency
be
twee
n th
e m
unic
ipal
ities
.
Wor
k w
ith m
embe
r mun
icip
aliti
es to
revi
ew th
e lis
t of m
ater
ials
11
.1
colle
cted
from
resi
denc
es a
nd IC
I sou
rces
. D
evel
op a
st
rate
gy to
har
mon
ize
leve
ls o
f ser
vice
in a
ll M
etro
Van
couv
er
mun
icip
aliti
es
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
Res
iden
tial a
nd
ICI
2012
Esta
blis
h ne
w o
ne-s
top-
drop
12
ce
ntre
s fo
r rec
yclin
g.
With
mun
icip
aliti
es d
eter
min
e th
e te
rms
and
cond
ition
s fo
r 12
.1
parti
cipa
ting
mun
icip
aliti
es a
nd in
dust
ries.
Met
ro V
anco
uver
, m
unic
ipal
ities
, R
CBC
, BC
MoE
, th
e BC
Pro
duct
St
ewar
dshi
p C
ounc
il an
d th
e BC
ste
war
dshi
p ag
enci
es
Res
iden
tial a
nd
ICI
2011
Con
tinue
to w
ork
with
13
m
unic
ipal
ities
, EPR
gro
ups
and
loca
l com
mun
ity g
roup
s to
min
imiz
e w
aste
and
impr
ove
recy
clin
g at
com
mun
ity a
nd/ o
r re
gion
al fe
stiv
als
and
even
ts
incl
udin
g co
nfer
ence
s an
d tr
ades
how
s.
Con
clud
e th
e pi
lot s
tudy
on
Zero
Was
te fe
stiv
als
and
even
ts.
13.1
D
evel
op a
Zer
o W
aste
tool
kit
for f
estiv
als
and
even
ts.
13.2
M
etro
Va
ncou
ver a
nd
mun
icip
aliti
es
ICI
On-
goin
g
26
Stra
tegy
2.3
: Fac
ilita
te in
crea
sed
priv
ate
sect
or re
cycl
ing
Enco
urag
e pr
ivat
e se
ctor
recy
clin
g 14
ac
tiviti
es.
Mun
icip
aliti
es w
ill re
view
thei
r zon
ing
byla
w to
enc
oura
ge
14.1
re
cycl
ing
and
mat
eria
l rec
over
y ac
tiviti
es in
app
ropr
iate
ly z
oned
ar
eas.
Rev
iew
the
GV
S&
DD
Sol
id W
aste
Reg
ulat
ory
Byl
aw to
faci
litat
e 14
.2
the
sitin
g of
MS
W fa
cilit
ies
that
mee
t mun
icip
al b
ylaw
s.R
evie
w th
e op
portu
nity
for e
stab
lishi
ng a
non
-pro
fit o
rgan
isat
ion
14.3
th
at c
an fa
cilit
ate
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f rec
yclin
g bu
sine
ss a
nd
recy
clin
g m
arke
ts s
uch
as th
e “L
ondo
n R
emad
e” m
odel
in
Lond
on E
ngla
nd o
r “R
ecyc
ling
Mar
ket D
evel
opm
ent Z
ones
” in
Cal
iforn
ia.
16.4
Wor
k w
ith th
e P
rovi
ncia
l and
Fed
eral
gov
ernm
ents
to id
entif
y 14
.4
and
esta
blis
h m
inim
um p
ost-c
onsu
mer
recy
cled
con
tent
in
cons
umer
goo
ds.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
ICI a
nd D
LC20
11
27
Stra
tegy
2.4
: Tar
get d
emol
ition
, lan
d cl
earin
g an
d co
nstr
uctio
n (D
LC) s
ecto
r for
incr
ease
d re
use
and
recy
clin
g
Dev
elop
ince
ntiv
es fo
r-re
-use
and
15
re
mov
e ba
rrie
rs to
re-u
se o
f woo
d w
aste
Wor
k w
ith th
e P
rovi
nce
to e
xpan
d th
e in
clus
ion
of re
-use
woo
d in
15
.1
build
ing
code
s.P
rovi
de in
form
atio
n an
d ed
ucat
ion
prog
ram
s to
ena
ble
mor
e 15
.2
effe
ctiv
e re
cycl
ing
of D
LC w
aste
.
Met
ro V
anco
uver
DLC
2010
Dev
elop
a p
olic
y to
regi
onal
ly
16
man
date
DLC
recy
clin
g at
the
job
site
.
Rev
iew
exi
stin
g pe
rmitt
ing
stru
ctur
es fo
r con
stru
ctio
n an
d 16
.1
dem
oliti
on in
the
regi
onR
evie
w o
ptio
ns w
ith re
spec
t to
incl
udin
g a
depo
sit s
yste
m o
r 16
.2
othe
r fina
ncia
l inc
entiv
es to
incr
ease
follo
w-th
roug
h of
was
te
man
agem
ent p
lans
Cha
nge
mun
icip
al b
uild
ing
and
dem
oliti
on p
erm
ittin
g pr
oces
ses
16.3
su
ch th
at a
was
te m
anag
emen
t pla
n is
a re
quire
men
t of s
uch
perm
its.
Brin
g fo
rwar
d a
polic
y by
Dec
embe
r 201
1. W
hen
the
polic
y is
16
.4
appr
oved
by
the
Boa
rd a
nd s
igne
d of
f by
the
Min
iste
r, it
will
be
deem
ed to
be
part
of th
e S
WM
P an
d w
ill b
e im
plem
ente
d by
m
embe
r mun
icip
aliti
es.
Met
ro V
anco
uver
, m
unic
ipal
ities
an
d D
LC S
ecto
r
DLC
By
2012
Add
ress
futu
re D
LC re
cycl
ing
and
17
proc
essi
ng c
apac
ityC
arry
out
an
asse
ssm
ent o
f exi
stin
g D
LC p
roce
ssin
g fa
cilit
ies.
17
.1 R
evie
w lo
ng-te
rm re
cycl
ing,
pro
cess
ing
and
disp
osal
nee
ds a
nd
17.2
oppo
rtuni
ties
for D
LC w
aste
.
Met
ro V
anco
uver
an
d D
LC W
aste
M
anag
emen
t S
ecto
r
DLC
/ IC
I20
11
Impl
emen
t was
te re
duct
ion
18
stra
tegi
es d
irect
ed to
war
d di
vert
ing
DLC
was
te fr
om
disp
osal
whi
le s
uppo
rtin
g op
port
uniti
es fo
r ben
efici
al u
se.
Eva
luat
e pi
lot w
ork
with
reta
ilers
and
pro
duce
rs w
ith th
e 18
.1
obje
ctiv
e of
iden
tifyi
ng re
taile
rs th
at c
an a
ssis
t in
the
colle
ctio
n of
DLC
mat
eria
ls a
nd id
entif
ying
way
s of
recy
clin
g D
LC w
aste
th
at w
ill w
ork
for w
aste
pro
duce
rs.
As
trans
fer s
tatio
ns a
re u
pgra
ded
cons
ider
pro
vidi
ng a
n ar
ea fo
r 18
.2
sepa
rate
d D
LC m
ater
ial d
rop-
off
Met
ro V
anco
uver
DLC
and
R
esid
entia
lO
n-go
ing
28
Stra
tegy
2.5
: Red
uce
pape
r and
pap
erbo
ard
bein
g di
spos
ed
Red
uce
unw
ante
d ju
nk m
ail a
nd
19
othe
r pub
licat
ions
.C
ondu
ct e
duca
tion
and
info
rmat
ion
prog
ram
s on
how
to re
duce
19
.1
unw
ante
d ju
nk m
ail.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
On
goin
g
Prom
ote
redu
ced
pape
r use
20
an
d in
crea
se p
aper
recy
clin
g op
port
uniti
es in
sch
ools
and
bu
sine
sses
Targ
et, p
aper
and
pap
erbo
ard
as p
art o
f a c
omm
unity
bas
ed
20.1
so
cial
mar
ketin
g ca
mpa
ign
to d
eter
min
e ba
rrie
rs to
recy
clin
g.P
rovi
de ta
rget
ed o
utre
ach
prog
ram
to b
usin
esse
s on
how
to
20.2
in
crea
se p
aper
recy
clin
g.Ta
rget
Sch
ool D
istri
cts
and
priv
ate
scho
ols
for c
ondu
ctin
g pi
lot
20.3
as
sess
men
ts p
rom
otin
g w
aste
redu
ctio
n an
d re
cycl
ing
Met
roVa
ncou
ver/
scho
ol d
istri
cts/
m
unic
ipal
ities
ICI
On-
goin
g
Div
ert f
ood
cont
amin
ated
pap
er
21
and
pape
rboa
rd to
org
anic
s m
anag
emen
t fac
ilitie
s.
Iden
tify
whi
ch p
aper
and
pap
erbo
ard
prod
ucts
are
sui
tabl
e fo
r 21
.1
proc
essi
ng a
t an
orga
nics
man
agem
ent f
acili
ty.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
Follo
win
g im
plen
tatio
n of
A
ctio
n 22
Stra
tegy
2.6
: Tar
get o
rgan
ics
for r
ecov
ery
Div
ert o
rgan
ics
from
the
was
te
22
stre
am.
Est
ablis
h an
org
anic
s pr
oces
sing
faci
lity
22.1
D
evel
op a
wor
k pl
an fo
r the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
mun
icip
al fo
od
22.2
w
aste
col
lect
ion
from
sin
gle
fam
ily re
side
nces
.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
2009
Eval
uate
opt
ions
for p
roce
ssin
g of
23
or
gani
cs w
ith b
ioso
lids
and
othe
r ut
ility
resi
dual
s .
Com
plet
e tri
als
on c
omin
glin
g fo
od w
aste
with
was
tew
ater
sol
ids.
23.1
D
eter
min
e th
e co
st a
nd b
enefi
ts o
f com
min
glin
g bi
o-so
lids
with
23
.2
othe
r res
idue
s
Met
ro V
anco
uver
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
2010
Prom
ote
exis
ting
resi
dent
ial a
nd
24
offic
e pr
ogra
ms
such
as
back
yard
co
mpo
stin
g an
d gr
assc
yclin
g
Pro
mot
e ex
istin
g pr
ogra
ms
such
as
com
post
ing,
gra
sscy
clin
g,
24.1
m
ulch
ing,
and
wor
m c
ompo
stin
g an
d su
ppor
t with
app
ropr
iate
co
mm
unic
atio
n ac
tiviti
es.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
2011
29
Stra
tegy
2.7
: Tar
get p
last
ics
for i
ncre
ased
recy
clin
g.Ex
pand
the
recy
clin
g of
pla
stic
s 25
in
the
resi
dent
ial a
nd c
omm
erci
al
sect
ors.
Enc
oura
ge E
PR
pro
gram
s fo
r pla
stic
s th
at p
rovi
de in
cent
ives
for
25.1
al
tern
ativ
es to
non
-rec
ycla
ble
plas
tics.
Wor
k w
ith P
rovi
ncia
l and
Fed
eral
gov
ernm
ents
to re
quire
all
25.2
pl
astic
mat
eria
l sol
d in
BC
to h
ave
a m
ater
ial c
ode
iden
tifyi
ng it
’s
com
posi
tion.
Sta
ndar
dize
mun
icip
al p
rogr
ams
for c
olle
ctio
n of
pla
stic
s.25
.3
Met
ro V
anco
uver
R
esid
entia
l an
d IC
I/DLC
2011
Rev
iew
opt
ions
for r
educ
tion
of
26
plas
tic b
ag u
sage
.In
corp
orat
e pl
astic
bag
s in
to th
e E
PR
fram
ewor
k.26
.1
Und
erta
ke c
omm
unic
atio
n ac
tiviti
es to
redu
ce th
e us
e of
pla
stic
26
.2
bags
.
Met
ro V
anco
uver
an
d M
OE
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
2010
Stra
tegy
2.8
: Tar
get m
ulti-
fam
ily a
nd in
dust
rial,
com
mer
cial
and
inst
itutio
nal (
ICI)
sect
ors
to im
prov
e di
vers
ion
rate
sD
evel
op b
ylaw
s to
requ
ire
27
recy
clin
g in
all
mul
ti fa
mily
an
d co
mm
erci
al b
uild
ings
and
co
mpl
exes
.
Pro
duce
a m
odel
byl
aw to
requ
ire m
ultif
amily
and
com
mer
cial
27
.1
build
ings
to re
cycl
e.M
ake
avai
labl
e an
adv
isor
y se
rvic
e fo
r rec
yclin
g pr
ogra
ms
for
27.2
m
ultif
amily
and
com
mer
cial
bui
ldin
gs.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
ICI/R
esid
entia
l20
11
Stra
tegy
2.5
: Red
uce
pape
r and
pap
erbo
ard
bein
g di
spos
ed
Red
uce
unw
ante
d ju
nk m
ail a
nd
19
othe
r pub
licat
ions
.C
ondu
ct e
duca
tion
and
info
rmat
ion
prog
ram
s on
how
to re
duce
19
.1
unw
ante
d ju
nk m
ail.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
On
goin
g
Prom
ote
redu
ced
pape
r use
20
an
d in
crea
se p
aper
recy
clin
g op
port
uniti
es in
sch
ools
and
bu
sine
sses
Targ
et, p
aper
and
pap
erbo
ard
as p
art o
f a c
omm
unity
bas
ed
20.1
so
cial
mar
ketin
g ca
mpa
ign
to d
eter
min
e ba
rrie
rs to
recy
clin
g.P
rovi
de ta
rget
ed o
utre
ach
prog
ram
to b
usin
esse
s on
how
to
20.2
in
crea
se p
aper
recy
clin
g.Ta
rget
Sch
ool D
istri
cts
and
priv
ate
scho
ols
for c
ondu
ctin
g pi
lot
20.3
as
sess
men
ts p
rom
otin
g w
aste
redu
ctio
n an
d re
cycl
ing
Met
roVa
ncou
ver/
scho
ol d
istri
cts/
m
unic
ipal
ities
ICI
On-
goin
g
Div
ert f
ood
cont
amin
ated
pap
er
21
and
pape
rboa
rd to
org
anic
s m
anag
emen
t fac
ilitie
s.
Iden
tify
whi
ch p
aper
and
pap
erbo
ard
prod
ucts
are
sui
tabl
e fo
r 21
.1
proc
essi
ng a
t an
orga
nics
man
agem
ent f
acili
ty.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
Follo
win
g im
plen
tatio
n of
A
ctio
n 22
Stra
tegy
2.6
: Tar
get o
rgan
ics
for r
ecov
ery
Div
ert o
rgan
ics
from
the
was
te
22
stre
am.
Est
ablis
h an
org
anic
s pr
oces
sing
faci
lity
22.1
D
evel
op a
wor
k pl
an fo
r the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
mun
icip
al fo
od
22.2
w
aste
col
lect
ion
from
sin
gle
fam
ily re
side
nces
.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
2009
Eval
uate
opt
ions
for p
roce
ssin
g of
23
or
gani
cs w
ith b
ioso
lids
and
othe
r ut
ility
resi
dual
s .
Com
plet
e tri
als
on c
omin
glin
g fo
od w
aste
with
was
tew
ater
sol
ids.
23.1
D
eter
min
e th
e co
st a
nd b
enefi
ts o
f com
min
glin
g bi
o-so
lids
with
23
.2
othe
r res
idue
s
Met
ro V
anco
uver
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
2010
Prom
ote
exis
ting
resi
dent
ial a
nd
24
offic
e pr
ogra
ms
such
as
back
yard
co
mpo
stin
g an
d gr
assc
yclin
g
Pro
mot
e ex
istin
g pr
ogra
ms
such
as
com
post
ing,
gra
sscy
clin
g,
24.1
m
ulch
ing,
and
wor
m c
ompo
stin
g an
d su
ppor
t with
app
ropr
iate
co
mm
unic
atio
n ac
tiviti
es.
Met
ro
Vanc
ouve
r and
m
unic
ipal
ities
Res
iden
tial
and
ICI
2011
30
Appendix 4Zero Waste Challenge - goals/strategies - March 2
Demolition
Construction
Business
Commercial
Single Family
Residential
Multi-family
Residential
Outreach
Regulatory
Financial
Capital
Program
Assessment
Metro
Vancouver
Municipalities
Private Sector
Others
<1 yr
1-3 yrs
3-5 yrs
Wo
od
15
5,0
00
So
urc
e S
ep
ara
ted
wo
od
Co
nstr
uctio
n a
nd
ICI
Ad
dre
ss f
utu
re D
LC
re
cyclin
g a
nd
pro
ce
ssin
g c
ap
acity.
xx
xx
x
De
ve
lop
in
ce
ntive
s f
or
re-u
se
an
d r
em
ove
ba
rrie
rs t
o r
e-u
se
of
wo
od
wa
ste
xx
xx
xx
xx
De
ve
lop
a p
olic
y t
o r
eg
ion
ally
ma
nd
ate
DL
C
recyclin
g a
t th
e jo
b s
ite
.x
xx
xx
Imp
lem
en
t w
aste
re
du
ctio
n s
tra
teg
ies
dire
cte
d t
ow
ard
div
ert
ing
DL
C w
aste
fro
m
dis
po
sa
l w
hile
su
pp
ort
ing
op
po
rtu
nitie
s f
or
be
ne
ficia
l u
se
.
xx
xx
xx
xx
xx
En
co
ura
ge
priva
te s
ecto
r re
cyclin
g
activitie
s.
xx
xx
xx
xx
xx
Re
du
ce
th
e im
pe
dim
en
ts t
o r
eu
se
.x
xx
x
De
ve
lop
& d
isse
min
ate
se
cto
r sp
ecific
info
rma
tio
nx
xx
xx
xx
xx
xx
Wo
od
mix
ed
with
no
n-w
oo
d w
aste
sD
LC
/SF
RA
dd
ress f
utu
re D
LC
re
cyclin
g a
nd
pro
ce
ssin
g c
ap
acity.
xx
xx
x
De
ve
lop
a p
olic
y t
o r
eg
ion
ally
ma
nd
ate
DL
C
recyclin
g a
t th
e jo
b s
ite
.x
xx
xx
xx
x
Imp
lem
en
t w
aste
re
du
ctio
n s
tra
teg
ies
dire
cte
d t
ow
ard
div
ert
ing
DL
C w
aste
fro
m
dis
po
sa
l w
hile
su
pp
ort
ing
op
po
rtu
nitie
s f
or
be
ne
ficia
l u
se
.
xx
xx
xx
xx
xx
En
co
ura
ge
priva
te s
ecto
r re
cyclin
g
activitie
s.
xx
xx
xx
xx
xx
Re
du
ce
th
e im
pe
dim
en
ts t
o r
eu
se
.x
xx
x
De
ve
lop
& d
isse
min
ate
se
cto
r sp
ecific
info
rma
tio
nx
xx
xx
xx
xx
xx
ES
TIM
AT
ED
TIM
EF
RA
ME
MA
TE
RIA
LTA
RG
ET
TO
NN
AG
E
SU
B
CA
TE
GO
RIE
S
MA
IN
SO
UR
CE
Resp
on
sib
ilit
yTyp
e o
f A
cti
on
PR
OP
OS
ED
AC
TIO
NS
IN
SW
MP
Secto
r Targ
ete
d b
y
Fu
ture
Acti
on
Pa
pe
r1
65
,00
0IC
I, S
FR
, M
FR
ed
uce
un
wa
nte
d ju
nk m
ail
an
d o
the
r
pu
blic
atio
ns
xx
xx
xx
x
Pro
mo
te r
ed
uce
d p
ap
er
use
an
d in
cre
ase
d
pa
pe
r re
cyclin
g o
pp
ort
un
itie
s in
sch
oo
ls a
nd
bu
sin
esse
s.
xx
xx
x
Div
ert
fo
od
co
nta
min
ate
d p
ap
er
an
d
pa
pe
rbo
ard
to
org
an
ics m
an
ag
em
en
t
facili
tes
xx
xx
xx
xx
x
De
ve
lop
byla
ws t
o r
eq
uire
re
cyclin
g in
all
mu
lti-fa
mily
an
d c
om
me
rcia
l b
uild
ing
s a
nd
co
mp
lexe
s
xx
xx
xx
x
Be
a s
tro
ng
ad
vo
ca
te f
or
Exte
nd
ed
Pro
du
ce
r R
esp
on
sib
ility
(E
PR
) th
rou
gh
active
me
mb
ers
hip
on
ste
wa
rdsh
ip a
dvis
ory
co
mm
itte
es a
nd
pro
vin
cia
l a
nd
na
tio
na
l
EP
R s
tra
teg
ies.
xx
xx
xx
xx
x
Pa
rtn
er
with
Min
istr
y o
f E
nviro
nm
en
t to
imp
lem
en
t E
PR
pro
gra
ms.
xx
xx
xx
x
Esta
blis
h a
syste
m o
f E
co
-Ce
ntr
es lin
ke
d t
o
EP
R o
n a
vo
lun
tary
mu
nic
ipa
l b
asis
xx
xx
xx
x
De
ve
lop
& d
isse
min
ate
se
cto
r sp
ecific
info
rma
tio
nx
xx
xx
xx
xx
x
Fo
od
17
0,0
00
Mix
ed
ya
rd a
nd
foo
d w
aste
SF
RD
ive
rt o
rga
nic
s f
rom
th
e w
aste
str
ea
mx
xx
xx
xx
Eva
lua
te o
ptio
ns f
or
pro
ce
ssin
g o
f o
rga
nic
s
with
bio
so
lids a
nd
oth
er
utilit
y r
esid
ua
ls.
xx
xx
xx
Pro
mo
te e
xis
tin
g r
esid
en
tia
l a
nd
offic
e
pro
gra
ms s
uch
as b
ackya
rd c
om
po
stin
g
an
d g
rasscyclin
g.
xx
xx
xx
xx
Fo
od
wa
ste
on
lyIC
I/M
FR
Div
ert
org
an
ics f
rom
th
e w
aste
str
ea
mx
xx
xx
xx
Eva
lua
te o
ptio
ns f
or
pro
ce
ssin
g o
f o
rga
nic
s
with
bio
so
lids a
nd
oth
er
utilit
y r
esid
ua
ls.
xx
xx
xx
x
Pro
mo
te e
xis
tin
g r
esid
en
tia
l a
nd
offic
e
pro
gra
ms s
uch
as b
ackya
rd c
om
po
stin
g
an
d g
rasscyclin
g.
xx
xx
xx
xx
De
ve
lop
byla
ws t
o r
eq
uire
re
cyclin
g in
all
mu
lti-fa
mily
an
d c
om
me
rcia
l b
uild
ing
s a
nd
co
mp
lexe
s
xx
xx
xx
x
Ele
ctr
on
ics
20
,00
0
Ele
ctr
on
ics t
ha
t
are
cu
rre
ntly in
(e.g
. co
mp
ute
rs)
or
so
on
(e
.g.
ce
ll
ph
on
es)
to b
e in
EP
R p
rog
ram
ICI/
SF
R/M
FR
De
ve
lop
& d
isse
min
ate
se
cto
r sp
ecific
info
rma
tio
nx
xx
xx
xx
xx
Be
a s
tro
ng
ad
vo
ca
te f
or
Exte
nd
ed
Pro
du
ce
r R
esp
on
sib
ility
(E
PR
) th
rou
gh
active
me
mb
ers
hip
on
ste
wa
rdsh
ip a
dvis
ory
co
mm
itte
es a
nd
pro
vin
cia
l a
nd
na
tio
na
l
EP
R s
tra
teg
ies.
xx
xx
xx
xx
x
Pa
rtn
er
with
Min
istr
y o
f E
nviro
nm
en
t to
imp
lem
en
t E
PR
pro
gra
ms.
xx
xx
xx
x
Esta
blis
h a
syste
m o
f E
co
-Ce
ntr
es lin
ke
d t
o
EP
R o
n a
vo
lun
tary
mu
nic
ipa
l b
asis
xx
xx
xx
x
Ya
rd
wa
ste
60
,00
0S
FR
De
ve
lop
& d
isse
min
ate
se
cto
r sp
ecific
info
rma
tio
nx
xx
xx
xx
xx
Pro
mo
te e
xis
tin
g r
esid
en
tia
l a
nd
offic
e
pro
gra
ms s
uch
as b
ackya
rd c
om
po
stin
g
an
d g
rasscyclin
g.
xx
xx
xx
xx
Pla
sti
cs
30
,00
0IC
I/S
FR
/MF
RE
xp
an
d t
he
re
cyclin
g o
f p
lastics in
th
e
resid
en
tia
l a
nd
co
mm
erc
ial se
cto
rs.
xx
xx
xx
xx
xx
De
ve
lop
byla
ws t
o r
eq
uire
re
cyclin
g in
all
mu
lti-fa
mily
an
d c
om
me
rcia
l b
uild
ing
s a
nd
co
mp
lexe
s
xx
xx
xx
x
Be
a s
tro
ng
ad
vo
ca
te f
or
Exte
nd
ed
Pro
du
ce
r R
esp
on
sib
ility
(E
PR
) th
rou
gh
active
me
mb
ers
hip
on
ste
wa
rdsh
ip a
dvis
ory
co
mm
itte
es a
nd
pro
vin
cia
l a
nd
na
tio
na
l
EP
R s
tra
teg
ies.
xx
xx
xx
xx
x
Pa
rtn
er
with
Min
istr
y o
f E
nviro
nm
en
t to
imp
lem
en
t E
PR
pro
gra
ms.
xx
xx
xx
x
Esta
blis
h a
syste
m o
f E
co
-Ce
ntr
es lin
ke
d t
o
EP
R o
n a
vo
lun
tary
mu
nic
ipa
l b
asis
xx
xx
xx
x
Re
vie
w o
ptio
ns f
or
red
uctio
n o
f p
lastic b
ag
usa
ge
xx
xx
xx
xx
PRINTED IN CANADA ON RECYCLED PAPER
