RESIDENTIAL WASTE HAULING ASSESSMENT SERVICES. January 10, 2011 Presentation to Arvada City Council

Transcription

1 RESIDENTIAL WASTE HAULING ASSESSMENT SERVICES January 10, 2011 Presentation to Arvada City Council

2 CONSULTANT TEAM LBA Associates MSW Consultants Denver based recycling and waste management consultant 20+ years experience Former president of SWANA Exclusively serves municipal clientele Specialized waste management consulting firm National experience with collection system optimization and analysis Previous project work in Colorado for Boulder County and Larimer County Exclusively serves municipal clientele Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 2

3 PROJECT DRIVERS 2006 Sustainable Energy and Action Matrix identified increasing waste diversion as a cost-effective and expeditious way to decrease GHG emissions Current recycling rate was estimated at 14% 91 percent of residents in a 2009 Citizens Survey supported more recycling options Arvada s Community Sustainability Action Plan (to be finalized in 2011) sets a goal to increase waste diversion Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 3

4 PRESENTATION OVERVIEW Background Benchmarking Outreach to Private Haulers Outreach to Residential Customers Defining Alternative Options for Residential Collection Evaluation of Options Likely Acceptance by Stakeholders Concluding Statements Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 4

5 A BRIEF SUMMARY OF COMPLETED TASKS Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 5

6 PROJECT TIMELINE We are here Task May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Project Start-up Survey Waste Haulers Interview other communities/benchmarking Present to City Council Community outreach, articles in Arvada Report, Arvada Press, website created, surveys Citizen Focus Group Meeting with Waste Haulers Draft of study to staff and City Council Community meetings/feedback Feedback and data reviewed Council determination of next steps, if any Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 6

7 KEY BENCHMARKING RESULTS Cost to residential households Highest in Open collection systems Lowest in Exclusively-served collection systems Diversion increases when Recycling collection is provided to all households PAYT is required Collection of Yard Wastes and other Organics is provided to all households Recyclables are single-stream Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 7

8 KEY HAULER SURVEY RESULTS No standard recycling collection Approximately 42 percent pay extra for recycling No separate yard waste or organics collection 12 percent recycling rate Residential waste is 30 to 50 percent recyclables (bottles, cans, paper, yard waste) Older, higher polluting, heavier trucks on the road Some residential streets could have 7 or more trucks on any given day Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 8

9 KEY CUSTOMER SURVEY RESULTS Customers are generally satisfied with their hauler and the rates they pay 29.8% percent pay extra for recycling collection (42% reported by responding haulers) Rates are roughly in line with hauler survey responses Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 9

10 SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT Arvada Report Aug/Sept 2010 Dec/Jan 2011 Arvada Press and Your Hub August 2010 September 2010 October 2010 November 2010 December 2010 Hauler Letter July 2010 Citizen Task Force Meeting September 2010 Hauler Meetings September thru November 2010 Individual haulers All haulers Residential Survey Fall 2010 City Sustainability Website on-going updates Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 10

11 DEFINING ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS FOR EVALUATION Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 11

12 OPTION 1: ENHANCED HAULER LICENSING City to leave residential collection services to open market However, as a condition of licensing, haulers would have to Provide certain minimum service levels to every customer Require minimum vehicle operating and safety standards Provide reports to the City to enable accurate planning Rationale for including this option: Residential collection management via hauler licensing is in relatively wide use in Colorado (although not as much nationally) Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 12

13 OPTION 2: EXCLUSIVE COLLECTION PROVIDER City to manage a procurement to select the best qualified, lowest cost private contractor City would define specific service requirements in the contract and responding haulers would have to conform This project analyzed: Multiple Districts: Dividing Arvada into 4 quadrants and having a separate hauler in each quadrant Single Hauler: Contracting with a single hauler for the entire City Rationale for including these options: Nationally, exclusive collection is the most common form of residential collection service because of its ability to maintain efficient routing and secure low costs Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 13

14 WHY WERE THESE OPTIONS SELECTED? They have the best likelihood of meeting the city s goals (i.e., have greatest recycling potential as well as largest environmental & infrastructure impacts) They have worked well in other Colorado and U.S. communities to meet the same goals (they are proven) Allowed an evaluation of collection alternatives that ranged from an option similar to status quo (i.e., hauler licensing which maintains current private sector focus) to options where private haulers work more closely with city Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 14

15 RELATIVE NET COST OF DISPOSAL v. DIVERSION (excludes collection costs)

16 OPTIONS WE DID NOT INVESTIGATE Drop-off Recycling Municipal Collection Different numbers of exclusive districts (e.g., 2 districts instead of 4) Hybrid/Combination of Options Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 16

17 ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 17

18 TERMINOLOGY Status Quo Enhanced Licensing Multiple Districts Single Hauler Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 18

19 ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT SERVICE LEVELS Attributes Status Quo Enhanced Licensing Multiple Districts Single Hauler Trash Collection Frequency Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Recycling Collection Frequency Varies EOW EOW EOW Bundled Trash & Recycling No Yes Yes Yes PAYT Trash Rates (3 cart sizes) No Yes Yes Yes Single-Stream Recycling Varies Yes Yes Yes EOW Curbside Organics Collection No Optional (extra $) Optional (extra $) Optional (extra $) Hauler Provides Containers Varies Yes Yes Yes Automated Collection Varies Varies Yes Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 19

20 ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT MANAGEMENT Attributes Status Quo Enhanced Licensing Multiple Districts Single Hauler Who Bills the Customer Hauler Hauler Hauler City Minimum Safety Standards Set by City No Yes Yes Yes Required Reporting by Hauler to City No Yes Yes Yes Expected Residential Opt-Outs N/A N/A 10% 10% Participating Households 38,882 38,882 34,994 34,994 Number of Exclusive Service Districts N/A N/A 4 1 Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 20

21 WHY WE MADE THESE ASSUMPTIONS Collection Efficiency - exclusive districts allow route optimization & increased productivity (lower hauler costs) Lower costs to residents, less air emissions & less pavement impacts Single-Stream Recycling increases convenience for residents & haulers and increases the volume of material that can be recovered Bundled Trash & Recycling consistently provides residents with both services & increases diversion PAYT rates tied to how much trash residents have (those who recycle more/trash less pay less) Creates incentive & allows unlimited recycling, sets equitable rates (like a utility) & gives customers control over costs 21

22 A WORD ABOUT PAY-AS-YOU- THROW With exception of Waste Connections/Recycle Bank, there are currently only disincentives to recycle in Arvada PAYT gives a financial incentive to use the recycling program Colorado & national studies show that PAYT pricing can increase waste diversion by as much as 50 percent Residential households can pay for as little as one 20 gallon container of trash per week and recycle/ compost everything else More than 7,000 U.S. cities currently require PAYT pricing Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 22

23 RESULTS - RECYCLING RATES Current Diversion: 5,579 tons Maximum Diversion: 13,165 tons Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 23

24 RESULTS WEEKLY ROUTES Current Daily Street Passes: 3.3 Daily Street Passes w/ Exclusive District(s): 0.4 Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 24

25 RESULTS VEHICLE-RELATED GHG EMISSIONS (MTCO 2 E) *** There will be additional GHG reductions from increased recycling (not shown above) Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 25

26 RESULTS DIRECT COSTS OF COLLECTION (ESTIMATED $/MO) Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 26

27 RESULTS - RATE IMPACT ON TRASH & RECYCLING HOUSEHOLDS ($/MONTH) Bundled Recycling No Recycling Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 27

28 RESULTS - RATE IMPACT ON TRASH & RECYCLING HOUSEHOLDS Enhanced Licensing: Zero change to 11% savings Multiple Districts: 8% to 32% savings Single Hauler: 23% tp 42% savings Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 28

29 RESULTS - RATE IMPACT ON TRASH-ONLY HOUSEHOLDS ($/MONTH) Bundled Recycling No Recycling Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 29

30 RESULTS RATE IMPACT ON TRASH-ONLY HOUSEHOLDS Enhanced Licensing: 21% to 30% rate increase Multiple Districts: 7% savings to 20% increase Single Hauler: Zero change to 21% savings Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 30

31 RESULTS COLLECTION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT 11 Hauling Companies 7 to 9 Companies 4 Companies 1 Company Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 31

32 A WORD ON EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS Reduction in local collection-related employment will drive increase in regional processing-related employment Processing more recyclables Processing more organics Increases in recycling will also drive other downstream employment Material brokering Remanufacturing New market development Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 32

33 LIKELY ACCEPTANCE BY STAKEHOLDERS Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 33

34 STAKEHOLDER GROUPS Residential Voluntary Recyclers (30%) Trash-only Subscribers (70%) HOA Residents (25%) Non-HOA Residents (75%) Other Stakeholders Hauling Companies Landfills Recycling Facilities Manufacturers that use recycled products as a feedstock Compost Facilities City Public Works Department Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 34

35 CUSTOMER SURVEY FEEDBACK ON COSTS 86% of all respondents agree that It is important to obtain the lowest fee for curbside trash and recycling service 67% agree I would recycle more if it helped me save money on my trash collection 80% agree I would switch to a new hauler if I could receive the same or better service for a lower price Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 35

36 CUSTOMER SURVEY FEEDBACK ON REGULATION OF COLLECTION 58% agree The City should require haulers to provide a minimum standard of service to all residents 62% agree It is okay if some haulers cannot do business in Arvada because they cannot provide a minimum standard of service at a reasonable cost 59% agree The City should make haulers compete to provide better service at a lower cost, even if this keeps some haulers from doing business in Arvada The City should just not be involved at all in trash and recycling collection, even if this means that the best service/lowest costs aren't available to residents 32% agree 21% neutral 47% disagree Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 36

37 ACCEPTANCE BY RESIDENTIAL STAKEHOLDERS Voluntary Recyclers stand to receive the same or better service for the same or lower cost under all three options considered Expected to support all of the options Trash-only Subscribers would be expected to resist mandatory new services that cost them more than they are currently paying Only the Single Hauler option passes this test, although Multi-District option may come close HOA Residents Enjoy relatively lower rates compared to Non-HOA Residents Have relatively fewer collection trucks on their streets on any given day compared to Non-HOA residents Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 37

38 CONCLUDING STATEMENTS Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 38

39 CONCLUDING STATEMENTS All three options will increase diversion rates Multiple District and Single Hauler options will significantly reduce GHG emissions and truck traffic on City streets Will reduce rates for Voluntary Recyclers, but might not significantly reduce Trash-only Subscribers Single Hauler option will reduce everyone s rates (including Trash-only Subscribers) Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 39

40 CONCLUDING STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) There is an inverse relationship between environmental/cost impacts and local collection industry employment What is better for the environment and the rate payers is bad for the global hauling community, but potentially a big opportunity for the winning hauler(s) But more recycling drives downstream employment These results are driven by the assumptions we made. The City can direct us to refine or change the assumptions to better meet its needs. Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 40

41 QUESTIONS Waste Hauling Evaluation Project 41