by Michelle Millet
According to the long range calendar, this Tuesday the Davis City Council was set to discuss the potential implementation of a containerized green waste collection program.
The 2013 Davis Integrated Waste Management Plan, a document compiled by city staff with input from the Davis Natural Resource Commission, list the pro’s and con’s of switching from a loose-in-the-street-yard material to a green waste containerization program. Some of which include the following:
Con’s:
- Limited material collected each week
- Potential for lost yard material tonnage if reminder material is placed in the trash
- Potential for increased contamination of yard material
- Complaints from residents with large/established trees
- Residents will have 3 carts to store, businesses will have four
Pro’s:
- Cleaner pick-up of yard materials leading to a reduction in the necessity for weekly street sweeping.
- Increased bike safety
- Improved storm water quality
- Reduction of organic matter in the waste treatment plant
- Ability to collect food scraps and, soiled paper, and other non-recyclable organic material from all customers
The piece will focus on the final pro listed: The ability to collect food scraps and, soiled paper, and other non-recyclable organic material from all customers
In my article A Davis Families Attempts at Zero Waste, I noted:
Composting presents a huge challenge for us, mostly because the amount of food scraps generated by my family is more then we are able to effectively compost. Plus, I never seem to be able to get the ratio of wet to dry materials correct, or achieve the optimal temperate for the process to work correctly.
Considering the amount of feedback I got on this comment it seems that many people in Davis face a similar dilemma. After reading the article numerous people mentioned to me that they wanted to implement a backyard composting system, and in fact had tried but were unsuccessful for various reasons.
Some complained of odors, some that their piles attracted maggots, flies, and rodents, and some like me, had a hard time getting the ratio of wet to dry materials correct, and could not find the time to keep up with the necessary maintenance required to achieve a successful composting pile. They were excited to learn that the city was contemplating a program that would allow them to divert their food scraps from their garbage.
Allowing for residential collection of food scrap collection has multiple advantages.
They city of Davis has a goal, to divert 75% of it’s solid waste from landfills by 2020. It is estimated that food scraps comprise 25.4% of the total residential waste stream in Davis . A composting program would allow the diversion of this waste from the landfill to a composting facility. Currently all yard waste collected by DWR, and food scraps collected as part of the city’s commercial food scrap collection pilot program, are brought to a composting facility in Zamora run by Northern Recycling Compost.
Besides helping the city reach it’s solid waste management goal diverting food waste from landfills has significant environmental impacts, most notably it’s effect on green house gas emissions. When food waste is disposed in a landfill it quickly rots and becomes a significant source of methane-a potent greenhouse gas with 21 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide. According to a CalRecycle report landfills are the second largest anthropogenic source of methane in California.
Yolo County Landfill does have a methane capturing system, but these systems have their limitations. Food waste decomposes rapidly and can often start generating methane within days or weeks.
Efficient methane collection at a landfill cannot take place until an area (a cell) is closed and capped (covered with an impermeable membrane). Infact a CalRecycle published paper assumes landfill gas collection efficiencies of 0% for the first two years after waste placement, 50% the third year, 70% for year 4, and only 80% thereafter (CalRecycle, 2012).
Not only does composting reduce the amount of waste that needs to be disposed of, it converts this waste into a product that has many useful purposes.
For example benefits to farmers who use compost include: Increased soil water holding capacity and reduced runoff, beneficial micro-organisms to improve soil health, addition of organic matter and carbon sequestration, and improved soil.
Compost also provides low levels of all primary, secondary and micronutrients, many of which become depleted from agricultural lands over time and may not be replenished with conventional fertilizers.
Collection of residential food scraps and compostable materials, so these materials can be diverted from the landfill, and instead be converted to a composting material is beneficial in many ways, and I urge our council, and community members, to take these benefits into consideration when contemplating the pro’s and con’s of a green waste containerization collection program.
I’m okay going to a green waste container, but since Davis has so many trees there should be days scheduled (maybe one a month in the Fall) where residents can put leaves and branches out in the street and have them picked up the old way.
Most cities have trees and most have green waste containers, so it seems most have figured out a way around that.
In the Fall one can have huge amounts of leaves and the branches can be too big to containerize. I think one day a month in the Fall is a nice compromise.
I wouldn’t disagree.
Sacramento does seasonal claw operation.
I have a vague recollection of this option being discussed at a council meeting and DWR saying it wasn’t possibly but I don’t remember the details. I learned from a friend who lives in Seattle that they are allowed to put extra debris in compostable bags, so that might be an option.
I don’t understand why that isn’t an option, DWR has the equipment already, after all they’re using it right now. Have you ever tried putting branches in a bag?
I’ll check on it. If I remember correctly, which is not often the case, Rochelle brought up this possibility and DWR implied it had to by one or the other, it may have been cost related.
Here is what is say’s about this in the staff report for Tuesday’s meeting:
Option 2: Carts plus seasonal street pick-up
During leaf-drop season, customers may place yard materials only (no food scraps or other organics) loose-in-the-street for pick-up by DWR during a two month period from October 15 through December 15, annually. This allows customers to easily dispose of fallen leaves and other yard debris during the time of year when it is most needed. This is a more costly alternative as DWR would need to keep two sets of equipment in repair for running two different collection systems. Switching from cart collection to loose-in-the-street and back also causes customer confusion. Other cities that have opted for this method have had to increase staffing to monitor yard material pile placement and cite customers that leave piles out in the street during the wrong time of the year. DWR has indicated that additional street side pick-ups could be scheduled for a fee.
“DWR has indicated that additional street side pick-ups could be scheduled for a fee.”
As noted in my 8:38 pm post below, that system has worked very well in El Macero for over 15 years. The as-requested pile pickup fee is currently $4.00 per pile.
City of Woodland: “Street Piles: During leaf drop season, green waste street piles are collected weekly. During the rest of the year, street piles are collected once per month from each address and are allowed for only one week before each pickup date.”
Sounds like a good plan that Woodland has.
We have had containerized green waste in El Macero (provided by DWR) since before 1998 (when I moved here). If you drive around Davis and do a “clean streets” survey, I think it is very likely that you will find that the streets in El Macero are the cleanest in the city. We do have availability of service from “the claw” to pick up green waste piles each week on Monday. There is a $4.00 per pile fee for any requested pile pickups. Pile size is limited to no larger than 5′ by 5′ by 5′ Based on the El Macero Homeowners Association CC&R rules, piles can not be placed on the street any earlier than Sunday (24 hours prior to pickup), but actual practice by El Macero residents has occasional piles beginning on Saturdays. We are billed by DWR quarterly and any $4.00 pile fees appear on that quarterly bill.
I personally don’t see the greenhouse gas argument as being the most compelling reason for containerization. Putting an end to the current situation of organic material ending up in the storm sewer system is (for me) a much more compelling reason.
Bicycle and pedestrian safety is another compelling reason (from my perspective), and I don’t personally ride a bike. El Macero is a bicyclists mecca, in large part because the bicycle lanes are almost never clogged with myriad piles of green waste forcing bicylists to have to ride out in the automobile lanes and walkers to hae to walk in the automobile lane to bypass the pile.
This system has worked beautifully and economically in El Macero for oer 15 years. Seems like a precedent.
“I personally don’t see the greenhouse gas argument as being the most compelling reason for containerization.”
Why? Do you find it at all compelling?
Another question I have for you. (it’s a real one, not a rhetorical one) Do you think the city can reach it’s waste diversion goals without implementing a residential food scrap collection program. (one of our other NRC colleagues claims it can not).
We could save much more methane by outlawing cows. Why not outlaw meat?
If the goal is 100% waste diversion, then the answer is (by definition) obviously not. But perhaps that means it’s time to make a more realistic goal, rather than try to achieve the unachievable.
The City has set a goal to achieve 100% diversion by 2025.
Then the City’s goal is unattainable and should be changed.
No child left behind had a goal of 100% of students reading at grade level by 2014. How about a goal of 100% no rain on Sunday.
How many El Macero residents do their own yard work?
I don’t know. My wife and I do all our own, and have been doing it for each of the 15 years we have lived here.
Driving around El Macero on a Tuesday morning when the trash cans are out for pick up, I would say that a bit more than half the houses have green cans, so my guess as an answer to your question is a bit more than half.
Im assuming DWR picks up these green cans, and they go to the composting facility?
Yes, the green can pickups by DWR are handled the same way for El Macero as the green pile pickups by DWR are handled for Davis. The individual lawn services vary in how they handle any green waste they cart away.
This is a terrible idea creating more work for people with limited benefit. The entire greenhouse gas argument is misinformed. Food waste is not from sequestered carbon from fossil fuel it is from carbon fixed from the atmosphere through photosynthesis. Carbon added to landfills becomes sequestered unless released so the only carbon that escapes does so before burial seals it in or methane capture occurs. An actual amount of green waste carbon recapture versus landfill recapture and sequestration could be estimated for food scraps instead of vague ideas about systems designs so we could get an actual cost benefit analysis. Of course any analysis needs to include the extra carbon dioxide produced by humans sweating to get it in the can. Last but not least we would need to include estimates of compliance on food scraps being separated out. With my trash can less than half full each week I’m already paying $5 dollars a month more for excess capacity so what incentive is there to bother?
“This is a terrible idea creating more work for people with limited benefit. ”
It continue to amazing how many things we fight in Davis that other communities have had for 20-25-30 years with no problems whatsoever.
We already have a high level of recycling. When comparing what we do with what other communities do it is important to consider why they do what they do and under what circumstances we do what we do. Simplistic replies of Seattle does it tells us little about what we should do without an analysis of similarities and differences as an underpinning for the discussion. Simply because someone else does something is not enough.
Toad, I really don’t think this is about recycling. For me it is about 1) public safety for bicyclists and pedestrians and 2) the elimination of organic polution in our storm sewers.
A bigger problem for public safety is bikes without lights.
Agreed, but that isn’t an either/or pair of public safety problems. The presence of the one does not negate the presence of the other.
“Toad, I really don’t think this is about recycling. ”
I do. And I’d add that until we reach a 100% diversion rate that no level of recycling is “high enough”. Food scrap diversion would be a significant step in this direction.
I don’t have a problem with you trying to reach 100% waste stream reduction. I have a problem with you trying to impose your philosophical view on me.
This isn’t about me and my personal goals. In 2011 the city passed a Zero Waste Resolution. I don’t see how it’s possible to achieve this goal without a food scrap collection program. If we don’t go a green waster containerization program then we will have to have some sort of separate food scrap collection program. It make sense to combine these two things.
It makes more sense to have realistic goals than to pass things that will never be achieved and then use them to impose draconian changes without a thorough understanding of the consequences of our actions.
It is about you and your personal goals. You want to stop production of methane and I can assure you you will never in your life reach 100% compliance with your own goal. In combination with other zealots Davis is likely to impose this nonsense on everyone and you can feel good about what you contributed to the community but in reality the amount of greenhouse gas emission reduction compared to the big sources will be minuscule and less effective than other possible solutions such as switching away from coal. The photovoltaics on my roof save more carbon from going into the atmosphere than you will ever save forcing this nonsense on me.
I agree, and the city has set up short term realistic goals. I don’t view a food scrap collection program as draconian. I’m not sure what negative consequences will arise from diverting food scraps from landfills to composting sites where this waste can be converted to a useful and beneficial product.
Its the can not the scraps that is the problem. Its making people stuff all their yard waste into a can that is the problem.
“Its making people stuff all their yard waste into a can that is the problem.”
I guess what it comes down to is that I don’t see this as a huge problem. Again Davis is only 1 of 3 other cities in CA that have this type of program. People seem to be handing it just fine.
Toad, I have had no problem stuffing my green waste into our can for 15 years, and I suspect our yard produces significantly more green waste than the average yard in Davis. It is really quite easy.
We have a “carry around” smaller container that we put the garden pruning materials and raking materials in at the site where they are either pruned or raked up, and then when that “carry around” is comfortably full, we carry it to the green can and dump in the contents. I suspect that you already have a “carry around” of your own and the only difference is that you take your container to the street when it is full and dump it onto the street surface.
Again, you can take this up with CalRecycle, they are the ones that supplied me with the methane data, and they seem pretty convinced that landfills are a significant source of this greenhouse gas.
As far a zealot goes, other words have been used to describe me by those who know me best, but zealot has never been one of them. I’m more of a do whats easiest kind of person.
Which is why a food scrap collection program is so appealing to me, and my non-zealot friends, who care about making difference but find themselves to busy with kids, and jobs, and lives, to do things like compost.
I don’t think asking people not to put yard waste in the street is that big of an imposition (especially given the imposition this action has on bikers, whose actions lead to a decrease in carbon emissions.)
It’s not carbon emissions they are concerned with it’s methane, a much more potent greenhouse gas. Here is a link to the Calrecycle report I referenced it you would like more info:
http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Actions/Documents/77/20132013/935/Landfilling%20of%20Waste%20FINAL.pdf
Methane is a hydrocarbon (chemical compound CH4) . . . and as such fits into the universe of carbon emissions.
Yeah, my husband corrected me on this detail, I saw carbon and my brain went to C02.
“Last but not least we would need to include estimates of compliance on food scraps being separated out. With my trash can less than half full each week I’m already paying $5 dollars a month more for excess capacity so what incentive is there to bother?”
I see this as one of the biggest challenges of the successful implementation of a residential food scrap collection program. But I don’t see it as an insurmountable one. If this idea moves forward, as an member of Natural Resource Commission I would actively investigate ways to maximize compliance.
Michelle wrote:
> If this idea moves forward, as an member of Natural Resource Commission
> I would actively investigate ways to maximize compliance.
I bet most people in Davis can fit all their trash in the black can, but separate trash for the recycle bin because they want to. There will be no doubt less people separating food scraps (since they are more of a mess than magazines and wine bottles) but we will still have a lot of people in Davis doing it.
P.S. On the topic of “zero waste” I was talking to my wife about it last night as I tossed some dental floss in the toilet and she said: “I wonder if you can use a toilet hooked up to a sewer system and still consider yourself a zero waste family?” I started to wonder if the toilet “didn’t count” would anything sent down the toilet (toilet paper, dental floss, Kleenex, a half pound of pot when the DEA was knocking at the door) count? We were also wondering if you could just hire people so “you” didn’t have any waste? When I painted a bathroom a while back I ended up with an empty paint can and a big ball of used masking tape that went in to the trash (after I let the little latex paint left in the can dry). Could we have just hired a painter and let “him” throw out the paint can and tape and say “we” didn’t throw anything in the trash?
First South of Davis, I’m glad you are thinking about these things, getting people to do was one of the objectives of my piece. I find myself wondering similar things as a go about my day to day life…
From what I read about the Bea and her family they are not attempting to game the system so they can say they aren’t throwing out trash. They are attempting to live in a way that does not GENERATE trash. Hiring people who do would defeat this purpose.
I checked her blog and here is how her family addresses some of the things you mentioned above:
Toilet paper: Yes, we still use it, at least until we get solar on the house and drying washlets on the toilet bowls. For now, it’s TP; 100%recycled and unbleached, individually wrapped in paper to bypass the common plastic wrapper on multiples, while we wait for better packaging options to come up on the market. Evergreen is packaged in cardboard but is only sold online.
Dental Floss: Switch to a brass gum stimulator with a rubber tip.
You didn’t ask but:
Feminine products: Switch to the Diva Cup and Glad Rags (I made mine from an old flannel shirt): Do I see some frowning? These require an up-front investment and take a couple months getting used to, but once you get the hang of it, you won’t go back to disposables.
As far as tissues go, my brief search on her page did not confirm this, but I’m sure they do not use tissues, my guess is that they use cloth handkerchief. The other thing I just learned while conducting this search is that used tissues are compostable.
Here is a link to the blog page that the above info is from:
http://zerowastehome.blogspot.com/2010/01/zero-waste-bathroom.html
“as I tossed some dental floss in the toilet”
Not a good idea. Dental floss can snag on the imperfections in your sewer line and, over time, build up a rat’s nest that can nearly stop the flow, since it doesn’t break down in water. I learned this the expensive way, and the plumber impressed upon me the wisdom of putting floss in the wastebasket instead of the toilet.
I too learned that the hard way Jim. Not dental floss in our case, but rather paper towels that also can snag on the imperfections in your sewer line and, over time, build up a rat’s nest that can nearly stop the flow, since it doesn’t break down in water.
I was wondering about that….
Here come the trash police.
I was thinking more along the lines of good public outreach and education.
At the risk of exposing myself as an environmental neanderthal, what about those of us who run all our food waste down the garbage disposal to the waste water plant. It isn’t part of the solid waste stream. Not sure what carbon gases are emitted…are we the only people in the universe who are still using a garbage disposal?
By the way the biggest source of greenhouse gas production in the USA is from the burning of coal. Changing the fuel source away from coal for our electricity would do more to reduce global warming than anything else we could do. A municipal utility that purchases only non coal generated electricity is a much better way to reduce our atmospheric carbon release.
Personally this will probably result in cutting down the big shade tree in front of the house. Its old and been badly pruned for decades before we owned it. I can never get anyone to prune it they all tell me I should cut it down. Its hard for me at my age and condition to cut it back and I don’t own a chipper. The idea of cutting the pieces down to size to fit into a can is truly unappealing. Oh well in another 20-25-30 years a new tree will grow up and shade the house again. In the meantime how much more carbon will be released cooling the house down? Probably more than is recaptured through containerizing my green waste.
The City of Davis is 1 of only 3 cities in the State of California that uses a loose in the street collection method. I am sure there are people in similar situation who live outside one of these 3 cities that have and have addressed similar issues.
If we’re going to go by what other cities do then why are we going to plastic bags when only 1 in 5 CA cities have such an ordinance? How many other CA cities have a turn in your neighbor smoke ordinance?
My point was not that we should do it because other cities do it. My point was that it seems to be working in many other cities, so we should be able to make it work here as well.
Like I stated earlier, I’m not against the container, but come Fall I and many of my neighbors have huge piles of leaves and branches that no way will fit in any container (Sycamores are very messy trees). If you’ve ever trimmed back a hedge, as I do every Spring, same thing, huge piles. The rest of the year I hardly have any clippings. In fact, in the winter and summer months a green container pickup would probably only have to get picked up once or twice a month, look at the savings there.
But now we have a new problem don’t we? Once food scraps are added to the mix the containers will have to be picked up weekly by law. What a mess.
The plan I read is that people would put their green waste containers out on the same day they put their garbage out. I’m curious why you think this would create a mess.
That is what we currently do in El Macero. All three cans go out for pickup on Tuesday morning and come back in to our yards later that day.
It is all very orderly. Far from a mess.
G.I., given that we have had green can service in El Macero for as long as I have lived here, I can attest that your winter pickup scenario is accurate. For the most part I only put out my green can every other week in the winter. However, that doesn’t actually result in any savings because the truck still needs to make its rounds. If my green can is not out they simply pass my house by and move on to the next green can that is out.
If food scraps go in you will have to put it out every week. (Or your suppossed to)
That was my point!!!!!!! If the scraps weren’t introduced then the cans wouldn’t have to be picked up every week, the schedule could be every other week or once a month for most of the year at a nice savings for the customer.
Virtually no savings, as noted in my 9:34 am comment (see below).
If food scraps did not go in with yard waste, then a 4th collection for food scraps would be necessary. (we can’t reach our waste management goals without food scrap collection) While a food scrap only container could be smaller it would require it’s separate additional pick-up. To keep this from happening I would like to see them added to green waste. FYI- If you get food scraps, out of you trash you would not have to bring your can down to the street every week (as long as there are no baby diapers or cat liter in it)
Hmmmm, so in winter and summer months green can pickup can be scheduled every other week or even once a month. It’s not hard. Think of the savings.
That would work if everyone follows that schedule.
Regarding the savings, they would be minimal. There would be no capital expense savings because the truck would still exist, only it would sit idle for a day. There would be no salary savings because the driver would be a full-time employee who would be directed to other tasks during those no pickup weeks. There would be no tipping fees savings because the amount of green recyclables would be the same, with only the timing of the tipping changed. So the only savings would be the fuel burned by the truck.
Removing a tree, especially a large one, will cost you at least $1,000 if you have a reputable company do it.
As I’ve said before, with 20 years experience in the waste management industry and thirty in public works, this is a boon for the can vendor and the person that gets their kickback. The added inconvenience of another can, more side loader trucks running up and down the streets, liability if GI breaks his leg by trying to pack more branches into the can or a bicyclist hits a full one in the dark and instead of a few scratches they have a couple of fractures, or worse, and to me, the opportunity for one ne’er do well to contaminate a whole truck load of material all negate any claimed benefit.
In my city, the streets are no clearer and the city gave up a more efficient and convenient system only to the benefit of Toter and now departed execs who made the dirty deals.
Biddlin ;>)/
From the point of view of someone with no experience with waste management, but someone who does believe in examining the pros and cons of any proposal, you have weakened your claim of expertise by citing only extreme examples of a single episode that you believe ( can you prove ? ) was based on kick backs and speculation about the possibility of law suits. With 20 years of experience in waste management and thirty in public works, surely you can provide a more evidence based argument against this proposal.
I would love to hear from both sides presented factually.
“or a bicyclist hits a full one in the dark”
I’m asking this question in all seriousness, is there currently a problem with bicyclist in this town hitting full garbage and recycling containers in the dark? (I know that lose waste does cause problems)
I don’t see how containers for green waste would add a greater risk to bikers then the one already presented by our garbage and recycling containers.
Biddlin, lets look at that broken leg risk liability in a bit more depth. First, the risk associated with a green can will be restricted to one day a week rather than the current multi-day broken leg risk that exists with the green piles that currently litter the streets of Davis. So risk will be reduced, not increased. Further, the broken leg risk you cite from cans already exists for the grey trash can and the blue and black recyclables can, so any incremental risk from adding a third can to the current two is minimal, if not non existant.
Biddlin wrote:
> As I’ve said before, with 20 years experience in the waste management industry
> and thirty in public works, this is a boon for the can vendor and the person that
> gets their kickback.
Are you friends with the guys who drive the “scoop” tractors (since even with a HUGE kickback to the can vendor we will save a ton of money with one guy in one truck collecting the green waste vs. one guy in a truck and one guy in the “scoop” tractor driving around town all week)?
> The added inconvenience of another can, more side loader trucks running up and
> down the streets, liability if GI breaks his leg by trying to pack more branches into
> the can
I bet Tia can ask some of her ER doctor friends how many people come in with broken legs from “trying to pack in more branches”. Since more than 90% of the towns in CA don’t have a “scoop” tractor picking up piles in front of homes and I don’t see a lot of people on crutches I’m betting the number of broken legs is low…
> or a bicyclist hits a full one in the dark and instead of a few scratches they
> have a couple of fractures,
I bet 90% of the cyclists in town would rather have easy to see big green bins than small piles of hard to see sticks logs and leaves…
I bet if they had lights on their bikes they would see the piles on the ground before they hit them.
I can attest to the fact that this is not the case. I find bike lights are better at alerting others of my presence, which I believe is their main purpose) then of actually lighting my path.
Hey its Davis. Let’s legislate better bike lights that illuminate whats in front of us. We certainly have no problems legislating everything else.
South of Davis: “I bet 90% of the cyclists in town would rather have easy to see big green bins than small piles of hard to see sticks logs and leaves…”
As one of those cyclists I can say that I concur.
Toad – lights that meet state requirements allow you to “be seen” but are less effective to “see” everything. To get lights that act as car lights is quite costly. AND, all it takes is one stray branch (tough to see even with good lights) to catch in a spoke to cause a “face plant.” I have interviewed several cyclists who were downed by green waste and it is almost always the small branch caught in a wheel that causes it.
Bikes are not cars…
Either way lack of bike lights is a bigger threat to public safety. Sit on any bike path at night and see how many bikes have no lights.
Why don’t you collect some data and write a piece about it for the Vanguard?
A group of University students in collaboration with the BAC and Davis Bicycles is going to be collecting counts of bikes with and without lights in the coming weeks. I agree with Toad–lack of lights on bikes is a big safety problem in Davis and will receive special attention in our soon to be published Bike Plan. No disagreement there. Apologies for moving off topic.
It isn’t off topic. The green piles create an ongoing and persistent safety hazard for bicyclists and pedestrians.
The absence of lights on bicycles is also a persistent and ongoing safety hazard.
Fixing both these safety hazards will improve public safety throughout Davis, and as best as I can tell at no incremental cost to the community.
I ride a bike a lot and have never found that the green piles are a safety problem either in the days before I used a light at all, or now that I have a really good light. I’m not against the containers, but Option 2 still seems like the best way to go at least for the first couple years. I have had a run-in with a pile of gravel. It was like being in one of those runaway truck ramps. Knocked me off my bike and made me laugh.
I agree Dave. Option 2 is what we have had for over 15 years. it works like clockwork.
Mr. Toad wrote: “By the way the biggest source of greenhouse gas production in the USA is from the burning of coal.”
In my article I claim:
“When food waste is disposed in a landfill it quickly rots and becomes a significant source of methane-a potent greenhouse gas with 21 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide. According to a CalRecycle report landfills are the second largest anthropogenic source of methane in California.”
I don’t see how are points contradict each other.
But how much is recaptured currently and what fraction of the total is anthropogenic.
“But how much is recaptured currently and what fraction of the total is anthropogenic.”
The recapture rate is a good question and while I was researching it I found many different answers depending on the source. In this piece I went with CalRecyle’s findings:
“CalRecycle published paper assumes landfill gas collection efficiencies of 0% for the first two years after waste placement, 50% the third year, 70% for year 4, and only 80% thereafter”
As far as what fraction of this is anthropogenic (pollution and pollutants originating in human activity) I’m assuming most if not all of the methane gas emitted from a landfill, which is filled with waste from humans, comes from this source.
But what percentage of atmospheric carbon emissions is from decomposing food. It seems in your quest for purity you are going to hit a fly with a sledgehammer.
Calrecycle does not see it this way.
After some consideration I realized that I could have framed this article in a better way. California is implenting new laws regarding waste stream reduction. A legitimate argument can be made that in order to comply with these laws Davis will need to implement a residential food scrap collection program.
So basically in all likelihood a food scrap collection program is going to have to happen. By combining it with a green waste containerization program we are able to consolidate two pick-ups to one as well as reap the other benefits that come along with a containerization program.
Switching will have it’s con’s and will come with problems that need to be addressed, but so does and so will staying with the current system.
Apparently 5 options will be presented to council on Tuesday, if David gives me the go ahead I’ll right a follow up piece laying out the options.
We don’t need another container, and if I have to take one it will just take up space in the side yard completely unused (It has been a few years since I put any organic waste in the street to be picked up). Most of the problem could be addressed with a little effort, a 4′ x 4′ compost bin and a worm box in every back yard.
Leaves and grass clippings don’t belong in the street under any circumstances in my opinion as they are easily managed on site. All you need to do is pile your leaves in a corner of the yard and let them decompose on their own (yes, you can choose to work harder when making compost, but you don’t have to). Grass clippings should be left on the lawn to break down in place, but if you insist on picking them up, just pile them on top of the pile of leaves and walk away. Once every year or two you spread the remains of the pile around the yard and start over. If you pay a yard service to care for your place, just have them do the collection and spreading work (we will all benefit when they pick up the leaves instead of spreading them all around the neighborhood with their leaf blowers).
Collecting food waste is really the only justification for collection bins, but even that isn’t necessary as food waste is easily handled with a box of red worms. My red worm box easily handles all of the food waste from our family of 6, and since it is a flow through design, all that is involved is adding food, shredded paper and an occasional pitcher of water to the top, and then watching the castings fall out the bottom. The only work is occasionally picking up the castings off the ground and spreading them around the garden. The cost of my worm box, including the worms, is less than the cost of a new collection bin, takes up less space, and won’t require any equipment on the street to service it.
Branches then are the only thing that might need to be picked up, and then only a few times a year. One or two pickups a month in the fall, and once or twice a quarter the rest of the year would be more than sufficient, especially if homeowners can call for a special pickup or the City provides space for dropping off large limbs the rest of the year. If we restrict putting branches in the street to the week of the pickup, there would be little issue for bike riders, with or without lights.
In short, I just don’t see the need for another collection bin.
In a perfect world your system is indeed the ideal Mark, but we don’t lie in a perfect world. In a perfect world I would ride my bicycle each day, but I don’t.
As a result of all this imperfection, lots of people need a green can.
BTW, you don’t hae to take a green can if you don’t want one.
Of course with densification many people don’t have an extra 4 ft x 4 ft of space for backyard composting.
I agree Toad. That is part of the imperfection I was pointing out to Mark
It’s not necessary to make an actual compost pile. Everything Mark West describes is better for your landscape than what people are doing now. If El Macero residents, for example, would have their gardening services use mulching mowers to mow the grass clippings and leave them on the lawns, they wouldn’t need to haul them away to the landfills — which is what happens now. If they told their gardening services simply to pile leaves along the borders, or out on the golf course, they wouldn’t need their gardening services to rake up leaves and haul those away to landfills — which is what happens now.
In smaller, denser neighborhoods, you can simply mow the clippings back in, you can just distribute the leaves around your shrubs and on your vegetable garden and in your orchard. There is zero reason for leaves or clippings to be taken off site. It is, in fact, only the branches from pruning that would need to end up in the street for pickup. And those don’t readily fit in yard waste bins. So the yard waste bins are pointless, expensive, unnecessary.
Spend the money on education programs about the benefits of leaving leaves and clippings. And retain occasional street pickup for branches that have been pruned.
“If they told their gardening services simply to pile leaves along the borders, or out on the golf course, they wouldn’t need their gardening services to rake up leaves and haul those away to landfills — which is what happens now.”
How would you keep the wind from just blowing them all over the again after they have been piled up?
So El Macero’s green waste is not sent to the composting facility in Zamora?
The wind will blow them to places where they will settle and decompose.
Most of the lawn clippings from El Macero are loaded onto trucks managed by professional gardening services. I don’t know for sure where they take them. My guess is that most of their yard debris is not picked up by DWR. Just watch the gardening services there on any given week day. They don’t pile it in the street. El Macero has a huge area of lawn per residence compared to any other community in the area.
Sorry missed the “mulching” part. I was picturing leaves flying all around the golf coarse….
Moreover, leaves don’t even have to be raked and piled. I have seen studies and experiments where leaves up to twelve inches deep were simply mowed over on the lawn, shredded by the mower, and left to decompose back into the grass. They enrich the soil, feed the worms, and create humus. Here’s one example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67Ne_nFFOxc
This does raise an interesting point. If we move to containerization then I imagine professional gardening services will be responsible for removing the green waste that doesn’t fit into a container. Where would this green waste end up? Instead of going to the compost facility, like it does now, would it end up in the landfill?
The practices of the various lawn services regarding where the lawn clippings go varies quite a bit. The service used by my neighbor to the east puts the clippings in that neighbor’s green can. My neighbor to the northeast has their service haul the clippings away. My two neighbors to the west put them in their green cans.
Some of my friends in the County part of Willowbank, which does not have Green Can service, complain that some lawn service debris from El Macero ends up getting dumped on their streets rather than getting taken to the land fill.
There are things besides leaves, lawn clippings, and large branches that get put in the street.
“We don’t need another container, and if I have to take one it will just take up space in the side yard completely unused (It has been a few years since I put any organic waste in the street to be picked up). ”
I don’t think you would be forced to take one, but I can check.
“Most of the problem could be addressed with a little effort, a 4′ x 4′ compost bin and a worm box in every back yard.”
I tried this a couple of years ago, poor worms, may they rest in piece, got overcooked during one of our hot Davis summers. (we left for a weeks vacations and they roasted.)
“The cost of my worm box, including the worms, is less than the cost of a new collection bin, takes up less space, and won’t require any equipment on the street to service it.”
I think this is a great option, but I was under the impression that it was more complicated then what you describe. From what I’ve learned care is needed to make sure the correct balance of bedding, water, and air are maintained, and that over feeding can result in the negative impacts I mentioned in my piece (oder and pest problem). I was also under the impression that these systems work best when food is cut up into small pieces, (an unnecessary step in the food scrap collection program). And that items like dairy and meat could not be put into these bins (they would be allowed in a food scrap collection program).
“I was under the impression that it was more complicated then what you describe.”
Some people have a tendency to make things more complicated then they need to be.
“care is needed to make sure the correct balance of bedding, water, and air are maintained”
I think that is true for any livestock you might wish to raise, be they chickens, dogs, children or worms. Worms are livestock and need to be cared for.
“over feeding can result in the negative impacts I mentioned in my piece (odor and pest problem).”
Absolutely true, and the easiest solution is to size your worm box such that you are unlikely to overfeed. If the box is large enough to handle more food waste than you are likely to produce in a day you will be much less likely to have a problem. It is much better to underfeed, than to overfeed a worm colony. Larger systems are also more forgiving in terms of short term temperature or moisture fluctuations and are consequently easier to manage.
“I was also under the impression that these systems work best when food is cut up into small pieces”
The food waste will certainly decompose faster if it is chopped up first, but that is not necessary and the un-chopped wastes will decompose just the same. If you are interested in growing worms for resale, then chopping the wastes may improve your worm growth rate and may therefore be warranted. I have not chopped any of the food wastes (or dead animals) that I’ve put into my worm boxes and I have not had any issues.
“And that items like dairy and meat could not be put into these bins”
The microorganisms doing the decomposition don’t care about the source of the food and neither will the worms. Some items decompose faster, but any item that is made from something that was once alive (plant, animal, etc) can be composted, and can go into a properly sized worm box. The big issue with meat and dairy products is that they often stink during decomposition, but in my experience, if they are buried under a layer of bedding they do not create a problem.
This is good information. Thanks for sharing it. You don’t have a problem in the summer during hot spells?
My boxes are outdoors and in the shade. They do dry out faster when it is hot, but that only requires adding a bit more water each week. Other than that, I have not had any problems with either hot days or cold nights.
I want to add that to achieve maximum compliance things need to made as easy as possible for people. While worm bins are great way to handle food scraps it’s an extra step that many, who would put food scraps in a container for pick-up, will not take. (these are the same people who will throw their plastic bottle in the trash, rather then bring it home to recycle for instance.)
Are we done for the night?
Thanks to everyone who read the piece and shared their thoughts, opinions, and idea’s. While I may not agree with them all, I appreciate the opportunity to learn from them and gain a better perspective on this issue.
I wonder how much food waste could be captured by having restaurants and grocery stores do this and leaving the rest of us alone.
Toad, they’re never going to leave the rest of us alone. The people that stack these committees have agendas and won’t be happy until everyone has to do as they do. Sure they will act like your opinion counts but when it comes down to policy you can bet it’s their way or the highway.
G.I., when you have a solution that costs no more than the current method, and produces clearbenefits vis-a-is public safety, why wouldn’t you want to implement that solution?
If we follow your approach, then we should do away with the grey trash cans too. Would that please you as well?
Nice try, but not a good analogy.
Why do you want grey cans and not green cans?
GI, on spot related to the concept of people wanting everyone to believe and act as they do.
Listen to yourself.
hpierce, I’m just giving my opinion. I’m not on any commission or NRC but would still like my OPINIONS considered. I’m not the one making policy. If you don’t like my opinions feel free not to read them and butt out.
There is a commercial food scrap collection pilot program in place in which some restaurants, grocery stores, and schools participate. In order to achieve the cities waste management goals this program will need to be expanded to include all of the above.
This pieces focused on residential food scrap collection which comprises approximately 25% of the waste going to the landfill. A residential food scrape collection gives this the ability to divert 1/4 of our waste.
Again in order to reach the city goals, and state ones, a food scrap collection program seems necessary, and the most efficient way of implementing this program is combining it with yard waste collection.
How much material do we already ship to Zamora for processing, and what is the estimate for the amount that will be added with food waste pickup? How much are we paying in tipping fees and transportation costs to manage that waste. I see the potential benefit of a local food waste pickup program, but I believe it would be a more sustainable and ecologically sound if we were to process the material closer to town, and recycled the end products back to the gardens in the community.
Seriously. Why is any yard waste going to Zamora? At the very least, just pile it up nearby on some vacant land and plow it in every now and then.
Considering the distance other cities have to transport their green waste Zamora is actually considered close.
There is talk underway of establishing a composting facility at the Yolo County Landfill
This is another option that is being considered:
http://www.energymanagertoday.com/anaerobic-digester-generates-1-mw-for-uc-davis-095588/
Wow. Good dialog. Sorry I missed it. I have been sick as a dog.
The City of Davis is 1 of only 3 cities in the State of California that uses a loose in the street collection method.
I love how we all go back and forth between the “keep Davis quirky” argument and then “but other cities are doing it” when it serves our opinion.
One major difference between most of Davis and other cities and unincorporated areas like El Macero is the size of the average yard. Most of us simply do not have room to store one of those large green waste container in our yard.
Blame the no-growers and the land preservation extremists for keep Davis one of the most population dense midsized standalone cities in the nation. With the cost of developable land kept artificially high, and the demand that we also keep housing affordable, we end up with tiny lots. Then we have a city policy to force-plant trees on our tiny lots.
Keep Davis green and quirky. No containerized green waste.
I’ve been thinking about this 25% food waste number and I don’t believe it. Go to the dump and see what is going in. By observation I’m doubtful. Where does this number come from?
Looking at the document suggests cherry picking of information by the author. As one example the paper she links shows food waste to be not 25% but 13%. The recapture of methane is a state wide value and includes landfills that don’t recapture as Yolo does. Also the paper claims that methane leakage is hard to calculate and the Data are not currently reliable. The paper claims the state will easily meet its AB 32 goal of GHG emission from landfills by 2020. Finally the paper states that GHG from landfills is only 1% of state output. The author claims not to be a zealot but a careful reading of the paper she links suggests that her interpretation of things makes a narrow and biased interpretation of the facts.
If everyone was required to run their food waste through a sink garbage disposal would that mean that the food waste to the landfill would become zero? I appreciate Don Shor’s comments about letting the leaves and clippings stay in place, so if there was only one collection point per block for branches and large woody pieces, wouldn’t that be more efficient (cheaper) for the claw to grab? It would cut the time needed for street pickup and should be cheaper than going to every house and dumping the green containers.
“If everyone was required to run their food waste through a sink garbage disposal would that mean that the food waste to the landfill would become zero? ”
The people at the waste water treatment plant would have some issues with this plan. Composting is a much superior option.