Recycling and Trash Collection

Recycling and Trash Collection in Modern Countries

Garbage becomes a community problem in many countries. The household contributes a big part of the national municipal solid waste, but indeed the bigger part comes from the industry and business operations. For the U.S., this waste product has hit a very astonishing count. Goldstein, N. And Madtes, C. (2000) claimed that the states had produced around 409,029,000 tons of municipal solid waste in 2000.

Trash stacks travel through several paths, addressing mostly to their final destination in local landfills or recycling centers. Although there are different methods applied and researched properly, the field execution differs in each country. Many countries have implemented different policies depending on the amount of garbage piling in concentrated location, open landfill availability, and at the same time, they also work on developing certain infrastructures to suffice the landfill location shortage, environmental concern and also the applicable funding system for the community.

Capital cities and industrial areas are where the topmost waste management problems occur. Big cities often have complicated situations dealing with urban issues, limitation of safe space for final disposal area, pollution, and the high living cost that results in the increasing trash collection and disposal fees.

The major approaches of trash come into three common categories: landfills, incineration, and recycling. The implementation of each procedure varies depending on the place and local policy. However, in general, landfill is the most commonly used to eat the trash in many regions.

In Facing America's Trash (1989), landfill use is considered inappropriate in the future. When a landfill is open, sometimes the function as "open dumping" is the only practice carried out, while close supervision on the sanitary control to the neighborhood and the soil pollution is rarely well implemented. Many landfills have contaminated the soil and groundwater; on the other hand, gases material as the result of prolonged decomposition process under the ground may explode poisonous gas like methane that endanger the living things in the area. For this reason, it is difficult to establish new landfills nowadays that meet the hygiene and esthetic requirement of the surrounding community (p. 271).

While technical matters relate directly to the effectiveness of implemented program, certain orders also play critical role as they determine exactly how a waste management practice is controlled, and how they apply in suitable manner for the country. It will ensure the constant accomplishment of the program and build strong basic for future development.

In different regions, governments apply diverse policies. This is quite understandable, since they naturally set specific goals in the plans that differ from each other. According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) report, as cited in Mohninger (1999), Canada, for example, has an exclusive goal on its "No Waste" program to reduce landfills. Therefore the country also applies the subsequent implementation design to apply in the community, such as encouraging employees from business and industry offices to do recycling themselves, which also takes the consequences to provide them enough infrastructures and required skills or trainings to utilize the equipments effectively.

Major countries with special concerns on solid waste management have been working under specified government rules within continuous overseeing and program development. At least, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

OECD) reported that several countries including Germany, Canada, and the U.S. have developed consistent programs.

From this review, solid wastes are categorized differently to provide enough background information for every country's government to develop strategic pattern, which is suitable with each specific issue in the local dumping areas. OECD report mentioned that governments currently work on five types of wastes as follows: "to reduce paper consumption, paper recycling, the reduction and recycling of office products, the recycling of construction and demolition debris, and the composting of organic waste." (Mohninger, 1999).

Not only the U.S., European countries and Japan also pay full attention to apposite management in handling such refuse. The governments establish certain regulations to deal with the production and closely monitor the development in technology to support the remediation programs. Although some practices are similar, the condition in each country may differ from others. It depends on the background and awareness of the citizens, as well as the available resources in every country.

A. Japan

The Japanese had started practicing careful management in solid waste since the 17th century. Although the regulation in this Edo (government) age did not address specifically to solid trash, they had put waste under several categories, which encouraged them to manage each type of the refuse properly. "Household waste," belonged to the first criteria, followed by road and drain garbage, "floating junks" in the waterways, and "waste from fire" (Hanley, 2001, par. 13).

They had employed official rules, especially when dealing with human waste, which seemed to be a very important priority, to keep the environment clean, not only by encouragement, but also by law. As the result of the policy, many proper waste disposals were established to replace the riverbank makeshift toilets, as early as in the middle of the 17th century (Hanley, 2001, par. 14).

In "Separation of Garbage Is the Global Citizen's Habit" (2001), the Japanese agreed for their inherited care for the environment cleanliness, even admitted that they once used to be "a totally recycling society" at that time. It is reported that the system really made use of all thrown-away materials, which then reprocessed into another functional items. Apparently, new approaches and innovation in technology have been invented to renew the benefit from human used clothes to human waste.

In the present time, the number of wastes disposed increase rapidly, sometimes makes it unmanageable to handle if one wants to meet the hygiene capacity in the past. The government started to encourage people to use the trash sorting facilities. They also set a certain goal to reduce the amount of national waste. The first place to start is within the government organization, where according to 1996 OECD Document cited by Mohninger (1999), would be released from the traditional method of waste sorting and dumping. The government planned to provide internal paper recycling equipment that the offices would be able to participate directly in waste reduction and recycling program, as well as to control their own use of paper.

One of the UN's programs in Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific noted that Japan has instigated a good practice in encouraging its people in solving the garbage problem.

Trash problem is serious in Japan. Many of the solid and paper wastes come from the wrapping in the industry. The Japanese are used to the sophisticated wrapping of merchandise products that often consume a lot of paper and plastic packaging.

Traditionally, the waste always ends up in the landfills like what happens in other countries. Recently, the scientists also found out that some parts of the garbage were drifted away by the stream and sea waves to the Pacific.

Before 1997 there were three collections made weekly in households, but later the government decided to change the policy into fortnight-collections and one recycling session. They began to apply the pay-as-you-throw system, using trash collection stickers to put on each trash bag in every house. People need to pay every time they need to dump their waste. In this way, people would manage to produce less - and controlled - rubbish than they used to do. This system also allows the community to fund their own garbage collection and management.

B. The United Kingdom

During the period of 1998-1999, the United Kingdom chose to have appropriate assignment for waste management, as nowadays England commonly produces 28 million municipal wastes, out of 400 million tones annual figure. Most of them (about 83%) went directly to landfills, while the other eight percent were processed to incinerator. Only nine percent got the way to the recycling plants (Pellaumail, K. 2001).

Landfills seem to be the only place where the country set to vanish the garbage out of the way, but from the available place, it seems that England will be short of free new dumping ground within a decade. As for the alternative, incinerator has not gained much popularity either, since many people still suspect for its potentially lung damaging smoke (Kirby, 2002, par. 13-14).

The government had improved the regulation, by strictly setting target to suppress the landfill approach and moving forward to encourage recycling. A White Paper released in 1995 had included the government's long-term goal, as they said that "the proportion of controlled waste being sent to landfill to 60% of 1995 levels by 2005" (UK DETR, 1998 as cited in Mohninger, 1999).

To this positive movement, a wave of environmental awareness swept parts of the departments that they began carrying out annual waste audit, worked out strategies to solve trash problems in every department, as well as encouraged internal process and provided the facilities to anticipate outdated trash piles. Facilities also improved with the availability of multi-colored trash bins so that people would be able to sort the garbage themselves. The taxes help much to pay the recycling expenses.

As a matter of fact, although recycling seemed to be a new solution for the country, Kirby (2002, par. 11-12) reported that England is left behind for its attentiveness in responding to the waste problem than its neighboring European countries. From 80% of recyclable waste that the country produces every year, only 11% is processed as should be, through material recovery. Compared to Germany and Austria, which commonly gain high number in recycling (48% and 64%), England should work better to avoid late consequences it may be compensated in the future from environmental and economic risks.

What had happened fact however becomes England's lesson to set better policy and develop more recycling facilities. One successful example of recycling in the UK happened in Northamptonshire. Together with the Waste Watch organization, the District Council launched intensive campaigns in 1998-1999. The public campaigns then accompanied with trial mode trash collection service for more than 5000 houses. The service provided them with weekly organic waste collection and another weekly "dry recyclables" collection. It was a very helpful service, as by using the assistance, the district authorities and the Waste Watch taught the public about recycling, through the accompanying hotline, flyers, home visits, and another information media. The ongoing exposure gave the people easy and comfortable way to learn. For a year, gradually people did it by themselves, to transfer the daily refuse disposal to a new recycling habit.

In the end of the trial, they filled inputs and feedback to the committee for further program development in another area and the improvement in the communication techniques. As the result, the recycling rate increased from the ordinary 12% to 51% within a year (Pellaumail, K. 2001).

C. The United States

With its large population, the U.S. tends to produce a huge amount of trash every year. Goldstein, N. And Madtes, C. (2000) compiled the research result of the garbage status in the U.S. From the 2001 result of BioCycle State of Garbage in America survey, about 409,029,000 tons of municipal solid waste piled up in the U.S. In 2000. Previously, according to the 2000 State of Garbage report, the amount of garbage was 7% less.

Just like in other region, landfills were the main choice to be the final disposal. They probably are still the favorite for its convenience. In fact, not all community members care much about it.

In 1996, about 55% of the garbage was processed to the landfills (The Council for Environmental Quality (1997), cited in Themelis, 2002). However, as many environmental concerns are piling up against landfill use, the government decides to terminate landfills use within two decades. More than 6000 landfills were active in 1986 itself, and the Environment Protection Agency had started working towards finding and promoting the more effective use of recycling and incineration to substitute the landfill function in the future.

Along with the program, curbside-recycling system has been helping recent communities in many states. The Curbside Programs in 2000 have involved and served 133,165,000 people or around 60% of the citizens.

Americans are used to sorting trash into different colored containers, which are processed afterwards by recycling or composting. In some cities like in Florida region, they can also use the collecting machine facility that is available in supermarkets. Some products also require the consumers to pay bottle fee for beverages for the bottle waste.

About thirty states in the U.S. have followed the drop off and pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) program, just like in Japan, while 27 states reported to apply PAYT program in various prices. PAYT is a promising choice, according to some of the State of The Garbage survey respondents. However, only 15 respondents out of 31 answers stated that they believed the PAYT system would ensure the increasing recycling and composting products, rather than leaving the trash decaying in the landfill ground. Many of them still think that this program may add more burdens to the community (Goldstein, N. And Madtes, C., 2000, p. 40).

In big cities like New York, this problem seems to be advancing. According to Themelis (2002), U.S. citizens may produce 0.8 tons of municipal solid waste per capita. However, about 22% of the findings are recycled plastic, metal, paper, and glass products. In New York, about 12,000 metric tons of trash are created every day.

Most of the trash go through selection processes and end up in recycling centers, combustion, and landfills (The Fresh Kills landfill was used to be the end disposal area before it was closed in 2001). The city shares work with private sanitation companies to handle the waste from household and from businesses and institutions. The municipal wastes are collected in three categories: recyclable paper, recyclable metal-glass-plastics, and other wastes, which are placed in different-colored bags.

Recently, recycling only reaches around 16.6% and combustion 12.4%, while the other 71% still takes the landfills. The recycling process itself goes differently for every product. The New York City implements Material Recovery Facility and Waste-to-Energy Facility. The biggest part of the materials is paper and paper products, reaching around 65% of total solid waste. The recyclable paper materials go through the sorting process to sort them out the plastic components. This residue apparently does not end in the paper recycling process, but repacked as another waste product and dumped in the landfills.

Cans, metals and glasses are easier if separated in its process. From this process, small parts of them including plastics and glass may be recovered and reprocessed to make different new products. However, some of the remains of the chemical treatment cannot be saved and often thrown together into the landfills.

Although in the ideal condition such approaches seem to fit the need to free up landfills from future use, some parts of the community do not help the progress of the program, by failing to sort their municipal solid waste into the right bag. It causes the delay in the whole sorting and recycling process, which would take more time to complete and ineffective energy to accomplish the procedures (Themelis, 2002).

Lifestyle, without good care on the side effect of the waste often gives the linear upshot on the number of discarded solid materials to the environment. Practical items that are commonly utilized to save time and space in the modern daily life, sometimes end up in the increasing removal of non-degradable substances into the municipal solid waste disposal.

In the mean time, citizens are used to disposable items for food storage, food serving (paper dishes, paper cups), cleaners, paper products (for example: diapers, paper tray), miscellaneous plastic bags, plastic products for electronics and wrappers for shipping, which they believe to be efficient and safe for home and office use. However, as they believe that such products are safe and recyclable, there is a rise in demand of the products, quite difficult enough for the recycling program to draw alongside. Therefore, Cooper (1998) said that recycling program has been successfully introduced in the U.S., however more trash still comes faster.

Somehow people should try better managing their paper product use. The government and educational institutions need to encourage better utilization to minimize the solid waste as well as to act prudently. For example, in the household level, people do not always have to use paper dishes when there is any chance to employ glass dishes instead, or they can recycle used glass bottles to decorate their houses.

The same principle should also apply for industries and corporation level, since their activities have consumed a high number of paper and plastic products, more than any domestic expenditure. Industries should be aware, as little things count, that even using both sides of the paper do help minimizing the unnecessary waste.

To accomplish this goal, the government may need to order specifically for the general practices in the economic sector. It is essential that people do know what their company have been contributing to the local environment and meet the requirement to follow the environmental alert recommendation from the government or any private inspector. For the maximum result, they could also establish private recycling center in their buildings or infrastructures.

This friendly approach has been implemented in the United States by the official Executive Orders that regulated the "waste prevention and recycling" throughout the country; while at the same time also increase the "markets for recovered materials." It is expected that the policy will help expanding the room for environment recovery where there are also early steps to avoid the waste problem itself by encouraging the involved parties to directly contribute their effort to manage their waste (Mohninger, 1999).

As the direct result of the encouragement, the U.S. government reportedly had opened public minds to establish recyclable product market, for various reasons such as hygienic, environmental, and economic motivation. Besides cutting the cost for post-treatment of the solid waste management, like decreasing the number of landfills, it also gives the community new business opportunities and lower-priced daily products from the recovered materials.

Another accentuation that apparently had given the breakthrough and practical application of the Executive Order to public practices is the "Closing the Circle" program, which ran under the 1993 Greening the Government Through Waste Prevention, Recycling and Federal Acquisition.

The government let the federal facilities to provide their community with special kinds of trainings, educational campaigns to increase public awareness on unnecessary paper product use. Since this was implemented in smaller extents, there should have been better public acceptance and deeper understanding of the disposal issue, as people do their own care every day. It is a direct result of the hands on experience.

D. Germany

Germany is acknowledged for its quality care of the environment, where recycling and composting has reached 48% from the annual national municipal solid waste production. This number falls on the third lead, after Austria (64% of waste) and Belgium (52%).

Cleanliness seems to meet the daily focus of life of the citizen that high priority is applied to solid waste management. According to the Separation of Garbage Is the Global Citizen's Habit (2001), many countries may see Germany as one of the most serious player in eliminating waste and carefully planned for the most effective method to involve all parties and develop the best facilities for disposal and recycling. The country has also been teaching its citizen, including the young people to think about waste seriously and apply all their knowledge in practical daily basis. German children may have learnt how to put trash separately into different bins of different colors, based on the categories and bring them to the proper local facilities for disposal, incineration or recycling, for a fee.