RECYCLINGPARTNERSHIP.ORG USING DATA TO DRIVE RECYCLING IMPROVEMENTS

Transcription

1 USING DATA TO DRIVE RECYCLING IMPROVEMENTS

2 We Work Hand in Hand with Communities and Companies IMPROVING RECYCLING FOR: THE ENVIRONMENT THE ECONOMY AND THRIVING COMMUNITIES OPERATIONS EDUCATION MEASURABLE CHANGE 2

3 National nonprofit transforming recycling in towns all across America Our Supporters

4 TRADITIONAL DATA TOOL: WASTE COMPOSITION STUDIES Waste Comps Looks at broad material stream across many potential diversion programs Good indicator of what can still be recovered. But Waste comps do only half the math to gauge recycling program performance Need program-level recycling data to calculate how a program is doing

5 CAPTURE RATE STUDIES Capture Rate Studies Randomized cart sampling indicates specific curbside performance, commodity level capture rates and contamination issues Trash Recyclables Recyclables Trash

6 How it Looks Like the Curbside Program is Doing Using a Traditional Recycling Rate Calculation RECYCLING RATE: Curbside versus ALL Household Material Generated LET S SAY A HOUSE HAS 800lbs RECYCLABLES lbs OTHER 2000lbs TOTAL AND 400lbs RECYCLABLES GO INTO RECYCLING 20% RECYCLING RATE 2000lbs TOTAL 6

7 How the Curbside Program is Really Doing Using Capture Rate Analysis Capture Data Shows Household Generates 800lbs RECYCLABLES 400lbs RECYCLABLES GO INTO RECYCLING 400lbs RECYCLABLES THEN GO INTO TRASH 50% 50% CAPTURE RATE CAPTURE RATE 7

8 Cart based auditing paired samples 8

9 Box truck collection to organize samples 9

10 ID each garbage and recycling sample to connect back to same address.

11 Wrap each sample in tarp.

12 The sort.

13 Material Categories % Captured including bagged % Captured excluding bagged Total Capture: 71% 63% Recyclable Paper 70% 63% Cardboard 81% 79% Mixed Paper 67% 58% Aseptic & Gable top 59% 53% Recyclable Metal 56% 49% Aluminum Cans 66% 55% Then show capture rate information Aluminum Foil & Trays 20% 18% Steel Cans 56% 51% Recyclable Glass 74% 67% Glass Containers 74% 67% Recyclable Plastic 51% 45% Clear PET Containers 60% 52% Other Containers & Small Rigids 40% 36% HDPE Natural Bottles & Jars 66% 57% HDPE Colored Bottles & Jars 56% 13 49% Bulky Rigid Plastics 48% 48%

14 Projects in Atlanta, Chicago, and Denver Piloted approach in areas of roughly 4,500 homes Started with capture rate baseline Implemented outreach strategy over 8 collection cycles Completed second capture rate study Analyzed behavior change Use results to plan city wide strategy

15 City of Atlanta

16 EXAMPLES 16

17 8 WEEKS, 4 ROUTES Monday 3104 Ansley Park / Midtown Tuesday 1205 Grant Park / Peoplestown Wednesday 3304 West End Thursday 3104 Collier Heights 17

18 The Strategy:

19 The Execution: General Info Supporting Campaign Direct Engagement Contaminant Specific 1 9

20 20

21 RESULTS 21

22 ATLANTA - CAPTURE RATES Before and After Data 2017 Pilot Areas - Single-Family - Curbside Service OVERALL CAPTURE RATE Capture increased from 52% to 66%

23 Homes with bagged recyclables fell from 52% to 22% BEFORE AFTER

24 Atlanta A/B Testing High Income (Group A) Low Income (Group B) Contamination detail before and after Do Not Bag intervention recyclables in bags recyclables in bags other contamination other contamination recyclables in bags recyclables in bags other contamination other contamination

25 OPTIMIZATION APP (RUBICON GLOBAL) 25

26 OLD SCHOOL AUDITING

27 NEW SCHOOL AUDITING

28 45% SET-OUT TWO GROUPS THROUGH TEST REJECTION AND PARTICIPATION RATES Sample Data PERIOD GROUP A GROUP B 42% 34% 18% 19% 24% 17% 32% 22% 34% 19% 32% 11% 29% WEEK Participation Group A: 82% Participation Group B: 57% (resident used cart at least once in 7 week period)

29 City of Chicago

30 The Program: 3 0

31 CHICAGO - CAPTURE RATES Before and After Data 2017 Pilot Areas - Single-Family - Alley Service OVERALL CAPTURE RATE Capture rate held at 50% Bagged recyclables average 3%

32 Aggregate Contamination in Chicago Carts

33 City of Denver

34 IMPROVING CAPTURE IN DENVER 34

35 Denver Material % Captured including bagged % Captured excluding bagged Total Capture: 71% 63% Recyclable Paper 70% 63% Cardboard 81% 79% Mixed Paper 67% 58% Aseptic & Gable top 59% 53% Recyclable Metal 56% 49% Aluminum Cans 66% 55% Then show capture rate information Aluminum Foil & Trays 20% 18% Steel Cans 56% 51% Recyclable Glass 74% 67% Glass Containers 74% 67% Recyclable Plastic 51% 45% Clear PET Containers 60% 52% Other Containers & Small Rigids 40% 36% HDPE Natural Bottles & Jars 66% 57% 35 HDPE Colored Bottles & Jars 56% 49%

36 Denver Material % Captured including bagged % Captured excluding bagged Total Capture: 71% 63% Recyclable Paper 70% 63% Cardboard 81% 79% Mixed Paper 67% 58% Aseptic & Gable top 59% 53% Recyclable Metal 56% 49% Aluminum Cans 66% 55% Then show capture rate information Aluminum Foil & Trays 20% 18% Steel Cans 56% 51% Recyclable Glass 74% 67% Glass Containers 74% 67% Recyclable Plastic 51% 45% Clear PET Containers 60% 52% Other Containers & Small Rigids 40% 36% HDPE Natural Bottles & Jars 66% 57% 36 HDPE Colored Bottles & Jars 56% 49%

37 DATA IN ACTION MATERIAL SPECIFIC CAMPAIGN 37

38 MATERIAL SPECIFIC CAMPAIGN Social Media Cart Tags 38

39 2017 DENVER RESULTS Recycling of loose aluminum cans in Group B increased from 47% 59% to That 12 point difference equates to an increase in can recycling of 25% 4 of those 12 points came from cans that were previously in the garbage 8 of those 12 points came from cans that were previously bagged (thus not captured) in recycling

40 TRY THESE TOOLS, JOIN OUR NETWORK, and let s make recycling more & better! TOOLS Online Library Starters BMPs IDEAS Webinars Newsletters E-Books Forums RESOURCES Grants Campaigns Tech Assistance recyclingpartnership.org

41 CORE LESSONS: Direct engagement with citizens works Combination of cart tagging, cart rejection, and mailers works 41

42 THANK YOU! Scott Mouw