Skip to Content

[X] CLOSEMENU

May 2015

NERC’s Advisory Members

Distinguished Benefactors

Consumer Technology Association (CTA)

Benefactors

Coca-Cola

Samsung

Waste Management

Sustaining Members

  • Advanced Drainage Systems

  • American Beverage Association

  • Association of Plastic Recyclers (APR)

  • Blount Fine Foods

  • BlueTriton Brands

  • Bulk Handling Systems

  • Casella Resource Solutions

  • CLYNK

  • Coca-Cola Beverages Northeast, Inc.

  • Council of State Governments/Eastern Regional Conference

  • Eco-Products

  • Fire Rover, LLC

  • GDB International

  • Glass Packaging Institute

  • Henkel

  • Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI)

  • International Bottled Water Association

  • Keep America Beautiful

  • Keurig Dr. Pepper

  • MRM

  • Nestle USA

  • NEWMOA

  • PaintCare

  • Plastics Industry Association

  • Re-TRAC

  • Recycling Partnership

  • Republic Services

  • Reverse Logistics Group

  • Revolution

  • Serlin Haley

  • Sims Municipal Recycling

  • Sonoco

  • Strategic Materials

  • Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council (SPLC)

  • TOMRA

  • US Composting Council (USCC)

A list of all the logos of our Sustaining Members can be found under Advisory Members

MEMBERSHIP

Renewing Sustaining Members

New Supporting Member

Member Spotlight - UNTHA America

NERC NEWS

ADVISORY MEMBER NEWS

OF GENERAL INTEREST


NERC’s mission is to promote sustainable materials management by supporting traditional and innovative solid waste best practices, focusing on waste prevention, toxics reduction, reuse, recycling and organics recovery.

State and Advisory Member Updates, as well articles of General Interest and guest blogs are provided as submissions to NERC and may not reflect the policy or position of the Northeast Recycling Council, Inc.

NERC is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

MEMBERSHIPNERC thanks Renewing Sustaining Members, ECOvanta and Metech Recycling, and our newest Supporting Member, American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA).

To see a complete listing of NERC's Members and Supporters, as well as the benefits of membership, visit the NERC Advisory Membership web page.

The broad spectrum of interests represented by NERC's Advisory Members, Individual Supporters, and Board Members and their willingness to participate significantly contribute to the unique and important role that NERC plays in recycling in the region.

With the addition of a new Director of Advisory Member Services, we are looking forward to a new and expanded membership program. 

Member Spotlight - UNTHA America

The recycling scene continues to change, challenging companies to innovate quickly to unthakeep up with trends and new technologies. One company that has been at the forefront of innovation for shredding equipment for many years is UNTHA shredding technology.  With a wide variety of shredders for applications from shredding electronic scrap to hazardous waste, UNTHA’s portfolio of products is extensive. The company also provides custom shredding solutions, like an installation at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute to shred sensitive medical records and documents, which resulted in significant cost savings to the organization.

Some Background

In 1970, Anton Unterwurzacher set up a small engineering firm just outside Salzburg, Austria that offered a varied range of general engineering services.

Then, in the early 1980’s, a local businessman asked Anton to produce a shredder capable of processing wooden packing cases and cardboard. This request led, in 1983, to the development and patent of the world’s first four-shaft cutting system with perforated screens.

Demand for UNTHA’s industrial shredders soon grew. In the mid 1980’s UNTHA began to export the technology to the rest of Europe and to America. Over the next two decades, UNTHA continued to add to its line of industrial strength shredders to keep pace with the growing recycling industry.

Acknowledging the evolving environmental agenda in North America and the growing number of inquiries coming from the U.S. and Canada, UNTHA expanded across the Atlantic. UNTHA America was established in 2007 as a result.   Keen to develop the greatest possible understanding of local vertical markets and attitudes towards trash, scrap and recycling in North America, UNTHA handpicked the most experienced engineering team for this new venture.

Now, UNTHA shredding technology and UNTHA America share:

  • A common commitment to innovation, quality and education
  • Determination to solve waste and recycling problems
  • The belief that customers should lie at the heart of every business decision.

“Our company believes in providing the highest quality engineering to our customers, and to meet the needs of large or small recycling business throughout the United States,” says Bernhard Martinz, President of UNTHA America. “We are very happy to be an Advisory Member with the Northeast Recycling Council because of the exposure we gain with the recycling industry.  We feel that our values align quite well with those of NERC.”

A Wide Variety of Products

Electronic Scrap Shredders – UNTHA’s e-scrap shredders are high torque, low speed UNTHA electronic scrap shreddershear shredders that achieve a powerful yet incredibly efficient shred. With patented four shaft shredding technology these tough machines pre-shred and re-shred material in a single pass resulting in a precisely defined, homogenous particle size, regardless of the initial bulkiness or complexity of the waste stream.

Waste to Energy/RDF Shredders – These shredders enable ordinary trash to be thoroughly processed and transformed into a valuable resource. This reduces our reliance on fossil fuels and enables us to create a clean energy from the waste that households and businesses continue to generate.

Confidential Document Shredders - The rugged, heavy duty nature of this four shaft shredder also means it will thrive in even the toughest of shredding conditions.  The specially designed cutters are incredibly hard-wearing lasting for over 4,000 operational hours before they need to be changed. Self-cleaning contra shears also heighten the machine’s reliability and reduce the amount of necessary ongoing maintenance.

UNTHA plastic recycling shredderPlastic Recycling Shredders – These shredders can handle everything from plastic film to automobile bumpers and dashboards using a single shaft design.

Food Waste Shredders – Designed to optimally process organic waste for anaerobic digestion, the shredding activity needs to be slow-runniUNTHA food waste shredderng and designed to produce a reliable particle size. These machines utilize an innovative cutting system with specific tooth and cutting gap geometrics to ensure the right fermentation substrate.

Hazardous Waste Shredders – UNTHA hazardous waste shredders handle materials such as batteries, chemical drums, and oil filters, on site.  Compact in size yet packed with robust functionality, these compact four shaft shredders have been specially designed to achieve high productivity and consistent throughput, even when tackling the aggressive substances associated with hazardous wastes.

UNTHA also offers shredders for industrial wood shredding, textile shredding, cable shredding, and aluminum can shredding.  But could it ever occur that one of UNTHA America’s shredders would be shredded?    “Though our machines have a reputation of lasting a long time we do have a reuse strategy.  When a customer wants to upgrade their equipment, our engineers will refurbish the shredder and put it back to work serving recyclers in their business,” says President Martinz.

"NERC is a great way to keep informed with what is going on in recycling and sustainability in the region,"  noted Charles Hildebrand, Regional Sales Manager.

NERC NEWS

NERC’s Spring Conference Drilled Down into the Issues of Sustainable Materials Management

Moving recycling towards a circular economy, extended producer responsibility, single stream recycling, and dirty MRFs were the topics discussed at NERC’s 2015 Conference held in Wilmington, Delaware on April 6 – 7.  The Conference presentations and panel discussions focused on where the different materials management strategies we’ve used have taken us and explored the future directions we’d like them to go.

The Conference was well attended by key representatives of federal, state, and local governments; recycling industry sector businesses and trade associations; haulers; non-profits; universities, and consultants. 

“NERC’s Conference was a great mix of timely topics and great presenters that attracted the right target audience for the discussions.” says Lynn Rubinstein, NERC’s Executive Director.  Following the Conference, the Delaware Solid Waste Authority (DSWA) provided a tour of the ReCommunity Single Stream Materials Recovery Facility and the Revolution Recovery Construction and Demolition Material Recovery Facility.  

NERC would like to thank DSWA for partnering with us on the Conference.  We’d also like to thank all of the presenters, attendees, exhibitors, and sponsors for contributing to the Conference and its success.

If you have any questions regarding the Conference, please contact Mary Ann Remolador, NERC’s Assistant Director and Conference Organizer.

NERC Elects Officers

At its recent Board of Directors meeting, NERC's Officers for FY16 were elected.  The current Officers were all re-elected - due to their outstanding performance and assistance to NERC.

President of the Board: Richard P. Watson P.E., BCEE, Chief Executive Officer, Delaware Solid Waste rick-watsonAuthority.  Rick was appointed as the Delaware Sold Waste Authonty's  (DSWA) Chief Executive Officer in December 2013. He received a Bachelor of Science degree In Civil Engineering from Clarkson University and a Masters of Civil Engineering degree from the University of Delaware. Nr. Watson has been a part of the DSWA family since 1981, where he first served  as a project engineer for Delaware's first double lined sanitary landfill.  He has been part of the NERC family for 6 years.

photo of Guy WatsonVice President of the Board: Guy Watson, Chief of the Bureau of Recycling and Hazardous Waste Management in the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Solid & Hazardous Waste.  Guy is also the Department’s representative to the New Jersey Clean Communities Council and has been a member of the NERC Board of Directors for more than 20 years. Prior to his position with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Guy was the recycling coordinator for Somerset County, New Jersey, and director of Middlebush Compost, Inc. He is a graduate of the University of Michigan and has been a professional in the recycling field for over thirty years.

photo of Sarah Kite-Reeves

Treasurer: Sarah Kite-Reeves, Director of Recycling Services for the Rhode Island Resource Recovery Corporation. In that capacity, Sarah is responsible for managing the municipal recycling program, has general oversight of the Materials Recycling Facility, leads the Corporation’s lobbying efforts, and manages advertising, PR, and public education and outreach activities for RIRRC. She has over 13 years of experience in the solid waste industry and is a certified Recycling Systems Manager.

Advisory Member Luncheon an Opportunity & A Success

On April 7 at the Own the Future: Creative Options to Sustainable Materials Management conference in Wilmington, Delaware, NERC hosted its annual Advisory Member only luncheon.  "With 25 members attending, it was definitely one of the best such events that NERC has held," said President of the Board, Rick Watson.Advisory Member Lunch April 7, 2015

Lynn Rubinstein, Executive Director of NERC, welcomed the members and invited each to describe their priorities and how NERC can support those concerns. In addition, to Lynn and the President tof the Board Rick Watson, the Vice President - Guy Watson of New Jersey, Greg Cooper, the Massachusetts Board representative, and Frank Hoffman, the NERC Director of Advisory Member Services, participated in the luncheon.  Three new Advisory Members took part as one of the benefits of membership. 

Among the points of conversation was an open discussion about recent changes in one member’s organization as well as challenges that another member has encountered in its recycling programs.  The discussion among members was helpful and informative for all  25 Advisory Members in attendance and provided a way for the new Advisory Members to hear from others about their organizations and for all to meet and network.  

For information about becoming an Advisory Member, visit the NERC Advisory Member page.

National State Electronics Challenge Awards Announced for 2014

Every year the State Electronics Challenge (SEC) - a national environmental leadership program administered by NERC, recognizes Partner organizations for their outstanding work in electronics stewardship by completing SEC program requirements.

For 2014, 12 SEC Partners have recently been awarded recognition for their achievements.  They are eligible for one of three recognition levels – Bronze, Silver, or Gold - based on completion of SEC program requirements. 

Congratulations to all of the award winners!

SEC Partner

Recognition

Lifecycle Phases

City of Corvallis, Oregon

Gold

Purchasing, Use, &

End-of-Life Management

City of Providence, Rhode Island, School Department

Gold

Purchasing, Use, &

End-of-Life Management

DuPage County, Illinois

Gold

Purchasing, Use, &

End-of-Life Management

Centre County Recycling & Refuse Authority, Pennsylvania

Gold

Purchasing, Use, &

End-of-Life Management

Chewonki Foundation, Maine

Gold

Purchasing, Use, &

End-of-Life Management

City of La Crosse, Wisconsin

Gold

Purchasing &

End-of-Life Management

Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC)

Gold

Purchasing, Use, &

End-of-Life Management

Borough of State College, Pennsylvania

Gold

Purchasing, Use, &

End-of-Life Management

Vermont Agency of Natural Resources

Gold

Purchasing, Use, &

End-of-Life Management

City of Fort Collins, Colorado

Silver

Purchasing &

End-of-Life Management

Upper Merion Township, Pennsylvania

Silver

Purchasing &

End-of-Life Management

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

Bronze

Purchasing

If your organization is interested in joining the Challenge, contact Lynn Rubinstein.

2014 State Electronics Challenge Partner Environmental Results

The State Electronics Challenge (SEC) program continues to grow, reaching 150 Partners in 2014, up from 129 Partners in 2013. Since 2012, the number of SEC Partners has increased 50%, from 100 Partners in 2012 to the current 150 Partners! Current Partners employ over 195,000 people.

The table below summarizes the environmental results of Partners’ efforts to “green” the lifecycle of their electronic  office equipment; from purchasing EPEAT® (Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool) registered computers and imaging equipment, to lowering the energy consumption in use, extending the lifetime of equipment, and responsibly recycling office electronics at the end of their service life.

46 Partners provided data on their 2014 SEC activities.

2014 Partner Environmental Benefits

 

 

Purchasing EPEAT® Products

Use

Reuse & Recycling

TOTAL BENEFITS

 

Reduction In

How Much?

How Much?

Equivalent To

 

 energy symbol

Energy use

  5.4 million kWh

  56 million kWh

 51 million kWh

   112 million kWh

Electricity to power  8,728 U.S. households/ year

 greenhouse gas image

Greenhouse gas emissions

916 metric tons of carbon equivalents

10,708 metric

tons of carbon equivalents

7,483 metric

tons of carbon equivalent

19,107 metric tons of carbon equivalents

Removing 13,600 cars from the road/year

 toxics symbol

Toxic materials, including lead & mercury

1,208 lbs.

2,157 lbs.

892 lbs.

4,257 lbs.

Weight of

936 bricks

 msw symbol

Municipal solid waste

138,241 lbs.

594,477 lbs.

1,687,003 lbs.

2,419,721 lbs.

Waste generated by 1,284 households annually

 

 hw symbol

Hazardous waste

33,967 lbs.

57,422 lbs.

303,225 lbs.

394,614 lbs.

Weight of 1,436 refrigerators

Want to Join the State Electronics Challenge? Free Webinar in May

The State Electronics Challenge is a national program open to non-federal government entities of any sort and size, as well as all schools, colleges, & universities, and non-profit organizations.  It will help you decrease the environmental footprint of your office equipment through simple steps that achieve maximum benefits at the least cost. And, in some cases, you even save money.  

Consider joining the 150 other Partners from around the country and learn about the State Electronics Challenge during a free webinar on Wednesday, May 19, 3 p.m. eastern:

For more information, contact info@stateelectronicschallenge.net, visit the website.

Vermont Resort Implements Food Scrap Composting

Jay Peak is a four season resort in Northern Vermont. The resort features a year-round indoor waterpark, ice arena, championship golf course and, of course, skiing and snowboarding, There’s a kids summer camp, music festival (and other special events), conference center, a wide range of accommodations (three hotels, a lodge, numerous cottages and suites, as well as condominiums), along with 12 restaurants and pubs. And, lots of food waste.Jay Peak_Dan Higgins_Chef Alices Table

NERC staff recently visited Jay Peak to work with Black Dirt Farm and representatives from the resort to implement food scrap composting. A small pilot project capturing “back of the house” preparation scraps from three of the kitchens had been initiated several months earlier. NERC and Black Dirt Farm staff met with chefs and staff from five of the Resort’s primary restaurants and food service kitchens to provide training on what’s acceptable in the program and how the new food scrap collection will work. Food collection carts are now in place at the five venues. All preparation food scraps will be collected, along with post-consumer wastes from the full-service restaurants. Dining staff will be responsible for scraping customer plates into the collection carts.

Jay Peak_new kitchen compost cartThe Resort has plans to phase in implementation of food scrap composting at its remaining venues, as well as at special events, and its condominiums.

Requirements under Vermont’s new Universal Recycling Law (Act 148), ban food scraps from landfill disposal through a phased-in timeline. Jay Peak is implementing food scrap composting in order to comply with the law and to advance its efforts to be a green resort. Jay Peak has recycling opportunities throughout the resort and has partnered with the Clear Water Carbon Fund to reduce its carbon footprint by planting trees along streams in Vermont. 

NERC received funding from EPA Region 1 (New England) to recruit and secure at least five hospitality businesses (e.g., hotels, resorts, restaurants, conference venues) and one sporting venue in Vermont to participate in sustainable food reduction, recovery, and composting programs. In addition, NERC will work to recruit hospitality and sports venues to join the EPA Food Recovery Challenge.

For more information contact Athena Lee Bradley, NERC Project Manager.

Interested in Green Procurement?  Join EPPNet

logo-eppnet

NERC’s Environmentally Preferable Products Procurement Listserv 

EPPnet links federal, state, and local environmental officials, and private procurement specialists charged with purchasing green products and services and developing policies for the procurement of these products.  EPPnet provides subscribers with quick access to information, such as: availability of product specifications, vendors of particular products, pricing information, green purchasing policies and initiatives, and strategies to achieve recycled product procurement goals. Please note: Private vendors are precluded from joining the listserv.

EPPnet is a Yahoo! Group, and membership must be approved. To join the listserv go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPPnet/ and click on “Join this Group!” You will be required to log into a Yahoo! Account. If you do not have one, you can set one up at that time, or sign in with Facebook or Google.

NERC Presented EPP Specs & Purchasing Guidelines to Public Purchasers

On a webinar hosted by the National Association of State Procurement Officials (NASPO), NERC presented its model environmentally preferable purchasing (EPP) specs and purchasing guidelines for paper, remanufactured toner cartridges, and office supplies to public purchasers across the country. 

While EPP purchasing has been around for more than 20 years, many states still find it difficult to incorporate EPP products into their purchasing programs.  Some of the reasons the purchasers who participated on the webinar sited for this are: cost of EPP products, lack of education about and understanding of EPP certifications, and sourcing reputable information. Of the 64 purchasers on the webinar, 33% of them indicated that 25% of their purchases are for EPP or “green” products.

NERC staff looks forward to continuing its work on promoting EPP through its grant from the Roy A. Hunt Foundation.  If your purchasing entity is interested in discussing how they can incorporate EPP into their purchasing programs, please have them contact Mary Ann Remolador, NERC’s Assistant Director. 

NERC Facebook Page Needs You!

Cristiano Ronaldo, Soccer player—102,377,446 likes now beats out Shakira at 100,253,358 likes. Michael Jackson lags behind at #13 with 75,213,336. NERC needs your help to catch up! We are now almost topping 300 likes! Please visit our Facebook page for our latest news and materials management happenings. While there, please “like” us if you haven’t already and asked your friends, family, and work associates to share the love for NERC too!

The Evolving Ton, A Blog Worth Repeating

The article was first posted in advance of NERC’s Spring 2015 Conference: Own the Future - Creative Options to Sustainable Materials Management, as it seemed timely to look at a developing issue in the recycling world—the “evolving ton”.

According to Susan Robinson, Federal Public Affairs Director for Waste Management (EPA Webinar Series, November 13, 2014), per capita waste generation is down 8% since 2000, while the mix of what goes into recycling is changing dramatically. This is not a new discussion. Dylan de Thomas, Editorial Director for Resource Recycling and Chaz Miller, State Programs Director for the National Waste & Recycling Association, have been writing about the “evolving ton” for several years now. View their keynote address at NERC’s Fall 2014 conference.

Newspaper and glass generation are in steep decline. Steel is declining, at least in its use in packaging. Paper board and similar paper packaging is waning in use. Even aluminum has seen a reduction. On the rise—aluminum foil/closures; HDPE natural bottles and other plastic containers; plastic bags, sacks, and wrap; PET bottles and jars; other plastic packaging; and, corrugated containers, No surprise in the rise of plastics since most of us see this in our product purchases. However, what does this changing mix in what’s collected in the recycling stream mean for the future of materials management? What is the impact on processors? And, what does it mean for materials management professionals as we plan and implement new strategies and programs?

Newspaper historically made up around 60% of the material collected in residential recycling.  Now with the rise of single-stream, paper is often marketed as a “curbside mixed” grade. According to Ms. Robinson, paper now makes up 45-60% of the residentially collected material processed at MRFs, while 40-55% of the mix is containers.

Evolving ton_Cr RobinsonNonmarketable glass and other residue continue to increase; currently comprising on average 16% of inbound material for processors handling single-stream materials—with residue running as high as 50% of inbound material. Another issue on the rise is plastic film, noted by Ms. Robinson as the “single biggest” processing issue at MRFs. Collected commercially and at special collection boxes, film has strong market opportunity. However, when it comes into single-stream processing it gets tangled up in the processing equipment.

Plastics, according to Ms. Robison, now make up 12.7% by weight of the waste stream and 25% by volume. Plastic bottles continue to be light-weighted, changing the monetary returns from these traditional plastic “money makers” in the recycling stream. From a processing angle, the results from this evolving ton mean that more material must be processed to make a ton of marketable commodity, contributing to a rise in processing costs. And, material revenues are falling.

On a related topic, I had the privilege of presenting at the MassRecycle R3 Recycling and Organics Conference yesterday. Ted Siegler with DSM Environmental Services was a keynote speaker. Mr. Siegler addressed the changing ton issue in terms of its impact on stagnant and even falling recycling rates. While single-stream is bringing in more recyclables for processing (albeit along with rising contamination), more plastics in the recycling stream and light weighting in general are having an impact on the nation’s recycling rate.

For recycling coordinators this makes life more difficult as we go to plan new programs and educate the public about the importance of recycling. Conflicting announcements about single-stream bringing in more recyclables, while recycling rates remain stagnant or fall, contributes to public confusion over the benefits of their recycling efforts. Looking at new ways to “count” our recovery will need to be considered as well.

Adding to the mix is increasing interest in food scrap diversion, electronics collections, product stewardship and extended producer responsibility, new approaches to education for single-stream recycling programs, a rise in reuse programs, zero waste, and the circular economy. Interesting times for materials management indeed!

By Athena Lee Bradley, NERC Project Manager

ADVISORY MEMBER NEWS

NEWMOA Releases Analysis of MSW Disposal

Municipal Solid Waste Disposal

Most MSW collection and disposal facilities in the northeast are owned and/or operated by private haulers and waste management companies. A small number are owned by municipal or county level government. When a disposal facility is publicly-owned, it can limit the geographic area from which it accepts MSW, and in certain situations can mandate that the MSW generated within the area it serves be managed at that facility (these restrictions are known as "flow control"). With the exception of MSW generated in these flow control areas, MSW functions as a commodity with disposal markets that can vary year-to-year depending on tipping fees, transportation costs, and contract arrangements. State governments do not direct where disposal of MSW occurs.

NEWMOA recently released an analysis of available 2012 data on state municipal solid waste (MSW) that is shipped for disposal. NEWMOA's presentation analyzes available state and regional MSW disposal information for calendar year 2012 along with comparisons to previous years. NEWMOA's Solid Waste Metrics Workgroup oversaw the MSW data collection and analysis and the development of the presentation of the results.

NEWMOA found that all of the Northeast states export MSW to facilities in other states in the region for disposal, and with the exception of Rhode Island and Vermont, disposal facilities in all of the NEWMOA states import MSW from other NEWMOA states. Other key observations include: 

  • Approximately 29.7 million tons of MSW was generated in the region and disposed of in 2012, a reduction of approximately 2 percent from 2010, and a reduction of 19 percent from the high of 36.6 million tons in 2002. The amount of MSW requiring disposal is affected by economic activity and the availability of reuse, recycling, and composting markets and infrastructure.
  • Region-wide, 71 percent remained in the state of origin for disposal, ranging from a high of 95 percent for Maine to a low of 62 percent for New York and 63 percent for New Jersey.
  • Region-wide, 6 percent was exported from the state of origin to another state within the region for disposal, ranging from a high of 26 percent for Rhode Island to a low of 2 percent for New Jersey.
  • Region-wide, 23 percent was exported to disposal facilities outside of the region, ranging from a high of 35 percent for New Jersey and 34 percent for New York to a low of zero for New Hampshire and Vermont.
  • Region-wide, 0.7 tons per person of MSW was generated and disposed of in 2012; with the rate ranging from 0.52 tons per person for New Hampshire to 0.91 tons per person for Rhode Island.
  • There is a relatively steady state or general decline since 1999 in the amount of MSW generated and disposed of within the same state.
  • Significant year-to-year changes in waste shipment patterns can occur. With the exception of Connecticut and Massachusetts, imports of MSW for disposal from other northeast states declined between 2010 and 2012. Imports to facilities in Connecticut increased by approximately 30,000 tons (42 percent), and imports to facilities in Massachusetts increased approximately 50,000 tons (7 percent).
  • In 2012, waste facilities in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Vermont exported less MSW for disposal to facilities in other northeast states than they did in 2010, while New York  and Rhode Island exported more.
  • There has been an overall decline in the quantity of MSW exported for disposal from each of the Northeast states to states and provinces outside of the region since 2004, as well as an overall region-wide decline from a high of approximately 10.5 million tons in 2002 to approximately 6.8 million tons in 2012 - a 35 percent reduction.

For more information on NEWMOA, visit http://www.newmoa.org/.

New UNTHA Waste Shredder Revolutionizing SRF Production Worldwide

Interest in UNTHA’s revolutionary XR-C waste shredder is gathering pace, as enquiries flood in from alternative fuel producers worldwide.

UNTHA shredding technology is currently working on proposals for more than 250 globaUNTHA_XR_Cutterl prospects, eager to reap the benefits of this innovative new technology. And European orders for the high value capital equipment stand at 5.000.000 EUR for the last six months, with Swiss-based Holcim and SITA the most recent clients to invest in the machine.

The robust XR Cutter is attracting so much attention due to its ability to produce a high quality Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF) in a single pass, with double the output per tonnage of competing machines. This is no mean feat considering bulky untreated waste can be fed in as input material. When comparing like-for-like tonnages, the XR uses 50% less power consumption than competitors’ traditional static electro-hydraulic shredders. In contrast to competing mobile diesel shredders, the XR’s power savings can reach up to 220%.

This is achievable thanks to UNTHA’s completely new high torque, slow speed ‘Eco Drive’ concept. Modern water-cooled synchronous motors work continuously without overheating, ensuring minimal disruption and highly sought-after uptime. This also keeps ongoing running and maintenance charges minimal, with typical wear costs significantly less than €1 per tonne.

Commenting on the XR’s popularity, Peter Streinik, UNTHA’s Head of Shredding Solutions for Waste said: “The beauty of the XR machine is its flexibility. The cutting concept is completely configurable, enabling alternative fuel producers to manufacture an RDF with a homogenous pre-determined particle size of 100-400mm, or a precise SRF with a 30mm fraction or less. Load-dependents speed controls also enable the XR’s RPM and torque to be adjusted and optimised, in order to achieve throughputs of up to 70 tonnes per hour. And of course, the fact that the XR provides the most cost effective way to produce SRF in a single pass, is a key selling point!

“I think Waste to Energy operators also realise that to truly commit to the global sustainability agenda, they should consider the energy efficiency of their WtE plants, not just the renewable nature of their finished product. In doing so, they can transform the profitability of their production systems, whilst being kinder to the environment too.”

The benefits of this cleverly designed technology do not stop there. Following four years of intensive research, development and engineering, plus a substantial €20m investment, UNTHA have been able to manufacture a shredder which puts the safety and wellbeing of the operator first. An ergonomically-considered construction ensures operators can service and maintain the XR quickly, safely and in an upright position. What’s more, the machine runs incredibly quietly – below 70dB(A) when empty and less than 80dB(A) when processing waste. At these levels, hearing would not be damaged, therefore ear protection is not required. This cannot be said for other marketplace solutions which operate at 85-110dB(A) and thus require hearing protection to be worn by law.

Peter concludes: “This machine was purposefully designed with the customer in mind. We have worked hard to implement features that will not only benefit the global resource agenda but will, crucially, improve clients’ bottom lines too.”

Commenting on his first-hand experience of UNTHA’s new XR technology, engineer Johann Handler, site manager at .A.S.A. Wiener Neustadt said: “The shredder is energy efficient (less than 4.0 kWh per metric ton) and requires little maintenance. Compared to previous models, the XR is considerably more resistant to extraneous materials and much quieter. The robust design – particularly regarding the thickness of the cutting chamber wall – and an increased cutting power significantly contribute to the machine's reliability. And over the long run, reliable solutions tend to be the most cost effective solutions for our company."

Evaluating the Total Package: Gaining a Better Understanding of the Bottled Water Industry’s Resource Use - IBWA’s Water & Energy Use Ratio Benchmarking Study

Has your company developed an environmental sustainability strategy or considered some sustainable initiatives? If you are reading this article, chances are you have already participated in a sustainability initiative of some sort—perhaps engaging in energy savings programs, reducing water use, or recycling waste. More companies are beginning to build sustainable initiatives into their business plans not only because “it’s the right thing to do” but also because it makes sound business sense.

Sustainable business practices result in more efficient processes and reduce wasted resources—and can save a company money in the long term. The key to a successful sustainability program is to begin by evaluating how resources are used in operational processes to generate your finished product, and then using that information to gauge performance. Perhaps the most difficult step is quantifying resource use: How do you set the scope? Where do you find the data? And how do you engage the right personnel to ensure you are effectively acquiring the information you need most?

In 2013, as part of its commitment to driving environmental stewardship and social responsibility in the beverage industry, IBWA commissioned a water use ratio benchmarking study as a first step toward understanding the impacts of water use in the North American bottled water industry. That inaugural study resulted in several key accomplishments: members collaborated to provide water use and production data for the study, best practices in water stewardship were identified, and an average water use ratio was established (i.e., 1.39 liters of water used per liter of bottled water produced for consumption). Based on the success of the inaugural study, IBWA elected to pursue a new benchmarking study in 2014 that expanded the study scope to include a five-year period (2009-2013) and an evaluation of both water and energy trends. The 2014 study further evaluated trends and observations reported in the inaugural study, updated the average water use ratio—the latest figure is 1.32 liter per liter (L/L)—and established an average energy use ratio—0.24 megajoules per liter (MJ/L)—for the North American bottled water industry. This study found that bottled water has the lowest water use ratio and energy use ratio of all packaged beverages.

The Challenge:

Preparing to Launch Your Study

As IBWA has found, building a successful benchmarking study is not easy. Several challenges may be encountered along the way. Those challenges can be overcome with thoughtful planning up front and communication with participants throughout the process. Following are some examples of how IBWA approached those challenges in order to generate a successful benchmarking study.

Setting the scope.

Many factors need to be considered when evaluating resource use at a facility or company level, and it is easy to become overwhelmed when initiating the process. Your first priority should be to set the scope of what is to be included and excluded from the study. IBWA modeled its study using the Beverage Industry Environmental Roundtable (BIER) methodology. Participants were asked to provide data for bottled water manufacturing facilities only; distribution centers, office buildings, and other non-manufacturing locations were excluded.

Metrics data was provided for operations “within the four walls” of the facility. That meant information for value chain operations was not included in the study (e.g., off –site bottle production, distribution to customers, customer refrigeration). IBWA selected total production, total water use, and total energy use as the key metrics for the benchmarking analysis based on IBWA member goals and alignment with other beverage industry studies. The study provided IBWA with valuable information on operational metrics use, and paved the way for future benchmarking studies to incorporate new factors, such as carbon emissions.

Building participation.

Active participation and buy in from your team is critical for the success of a benchmarking study. Data collection, process evaluation, and analysis require a lot of effort, so it is important to present the business case: Why should the team engage in this study? What’s in it for them? IBWA approached members by presenting benchmarking as an opportunity for the North American bottled water industry to demonstrate its dedication to sustainable business and to collaborate on best practices that could be shared internally and with external stakeholders, so that the greater industry could continue to work towards more efficient bottled water operations. The successful outcome of the inaugural study also helped to boost member participation in the 2014 study by 20 percent.

Collecting the data.

The success of a benchmarking study relies upon the availability of a complete, reliable data set. An effective data collection effort will set clear guidelines for required data, defi ne the requested measures (e.g., what constitutes “total water use”), establish a reasonable response period, and ensure that all parties involved with data collection and validation are aware of the study scope and boundaries. Participants in the IBWA study had varying internal data collection processes: some use advanced data management systems to electronically track data among several sites, others use spreadsheets to manually track information across invoices, and many participants needed to perform unit conversions to align with the requirements of the study. Use of the IBWA standard data collection workbook helped to take the guesswork out of data submittal. The workbook included standard definitions, well-defined data categories, and a unit conversion guide to support participants with consistent data entry, regardless of the source.

Supplemental process data.

Collecting quantitative and qualitative supporting data on facility process can shed light on the drivers of performance trends, and highlight process efficiencies or opportunities for improvement. The challenge lies in pinpointing the processes that should be the focus of the study, and making sure the data is available to support the trends that are being evaluated. To evaluate process characteristics among several facilities, IBWA asked participants a series of high-level process questions (e.g., Are bottles blow molded on site?). Such questions provided a good starting point for mapping data trends (e.g., facilities with on-site blow molding operations had a higher average energy use ratio than those that do not blow mold bottles on site) and paved the way for further evaluation in future studies (e.g., evaluation of process efficiencies associated with on-site blow molding operations).

The Outcome:

2014 IBWA Benchmarking Study Results- In November 2014, IBWA released the results of its second benchmarking study. This study represents 21.61 liters of bottled water production–more than half (56 percent) of the total U.S. bottled water consumption. That is a 20 percent increase in participation from the inaugural study. As mentioned previously, participants provided five years (2009-2013) of metrics data, and supplemental information such as facility type—small pack, home and office delivery (HOD), or mixed packaging; percent of final product packaged in refillable containers; use of cooling towers; and presence of on-site blow molding operations. The study identified the following five key takeaways.

No 1. The 2013 water use ratio was 1.32 L/L—including the liter of product forconsumption, and the 2013 energy use ratiowas 0.24 MJ/L for North American bottledwater facilities. Those ratios demonstrate a higherlevel of performance when compared to the global 2012averages for bottled water facilities as reported by the BIER (1.46 L/L water use ratio, 0.27 MJ/L energy use ratio). The charts below present the water and energy use ratio trends over the five-year period: the columns represent the fixed data set (facilities that provided five full years of water or energy use data) and the lines represent the dynamic data set (facilities that provided any data over the five years of the study).

No 2. Total production for the industry increased from 2009 to 2013, while total wateruse and energy use also increased. The wateruse ratio remained relatively flat, and the energyuse ratio decreased 14 percent over thefive-year study period. These trends in water andenergy use demonstrate that the industry’s investment inefficiency measures and process improvements are yieldingpositive results in water, energy, and cost savings, while theindustry experiences sustainable growth.

No 3. In general, bottled water facilities have the lowest water use ratio and energy use ratio when compared to other beverage sectors.On average, beverage sectors (such as carbonated softdrink bottling and beer production) have higher water andenergy use ratios driven by higher intensity process uniqueto those other beverages, such as flavor mixing, blending,carbonation, and fermentation.

No 4. Facility-specific processes also drive differences in the magnitude of water and energy use ratios. For example, some small pack facilitieshave bottle blow molding operations on site, resulting inadditional energy use and a higher energy use ratio forsmall pack facilities (0.25 MJ/L) compared to facilitytypes where bottles are sourced from off-site blow moldingoperations (HOD facilities, 0.12 MJ/L).

No 5. The North American bottled water industry continues to make significant efforts to reduce water and energy use through process improvements and best practices. The 2014 IBWA data collection workbook included a survey for participants to identify the top water stewardship and energy management initiatives implemented at their operations, as presented in the tables below.

The Payoff:

Understanding Your Resource Use

When you have addressed the aforementioned challenges and launch a benchmarking study, the results provide a holistic view of the operational resources that contribute to the generation of your final product. As IBWA has demonstrated in its benchmarking studies, this greater visibility into the North American bottled water industry’s water and energy use has helped bottlers measure their efficiency progress, identify additional opportunities for improvement through evaluation of process drivers, and share best practices for resource conservation and cost savings. By evaluating the total package in this manner, you begin to quantify all that really goes into producing that bottle of water—and that will allow you to make sound sustainability investments resulting in savings to your business and a better final product for consumers.

Source: Data collection for the 2014 IBWA Water and Energy Use Ratio Benchmarking Study

Laura Nelson, a sustainability consultant with Antea Group, managed the data collection, analysis, and report preparation for the 2014 IBWA Water and Energy Use Ratio Benchmarking Study. For more information on water and energy use benchmarking or other sustainability initiatives, contact Laura: laura.nelson@anteagroup.com.

Calling All Capital Cities!  Carton Council Wants Your Residents to Recycle More

This spring, the Carton Council of North America is asking all U.S. capital cities to take a Carton Capitals Launch Infographicsecond look at their recycling programs. And, they are letting them know that if they are one of the 23 capital cities that do not yet accept food and beverage cartons in their curbside, school or drop-off recycling programs, there has never been a better time to add them. Cartons are one of the fastest growing packaging formats in the country.

As part of a new “Carton Capitals” initiative, proactive outreach will be taking place with officials in the 23 state capitals that are not yet part of the carton recycling community, a community that now reaches more than 53 percent of U.S. households. The Carton Council will help these cities determine ways they can efficiently and easily add cartons to their recycling streams, making their programs more convenient for residents and more profitable. The industry hopes this will set off a chain reaction that will then ripple across their respective states. Currently, 27 capital cities, and the District of Columbia, accept cartons in their local programs, directly reaching more than 2.89 million households. Through “Carton Capitals,” the Carton Council will also be recognizing and celebrating capital cities, current ones and new ones that come on board for carton recycling.

“We’ve looked at the data,” said Carla Fantoni, head of communications for the Carton Council and vice president, communications, Tetra Pak, who is overseeing this campaign. “Not only do these capital cities represent many important households, but they set the tone for their entire state. For every capital city that adds cartons, we don’t just gain more recyclers in that city, which by itself is still a positive step. But, we can potentially gain recyclers across the entire state, as surrounding communities see the value that cartons can bring and begin taking steps to add cartons as well. Multiply this impact by 23 cities and carton recycling will grow exponentially.

Several capital cities are well poised to add cartons this year, and active recruiting efforts are under way with a number of them. Additionally, capitals that already have access, like Lansing, Mich., are helping to pave the way for more to come.

“I take great pride in establishing Lansing as a leader in solid waste best practices,” said Mayor Virgil Bernero, City of Lansing, Mich. “By adding cartons, we have succeeded in ramping up our recycling progress, reducing waste and extending the life of our landfills. During an era when waste diversion and Zero Waste are crucial to reaching broader sustainability goals, carton recycling is an easy and immediate step to take. This goes beyond any sustainability agenda; this can help your city save costs on landfill tipping fees and earn additional revenue, all contributing to the bottom line and facilitating growth for your local economy.”

Capital Cities with CURRENT Carton Recycling Access

Juneau, Alaska

Raleigh, N.C.

Montgomery, Ala.

Bismarck, N.D.

Phoenix, Ariz.

Concord, N.H.

Little Rock, Ark.

Trenton, N.J.

Denver, Colo.

Albany, N.Y.

Hartford, Conn.

Columbus, Ohio

Washington, D.C.

Salem, Ore.

Dover, Del.

Providence, R.I.

Des Moines, Iowa

Columbia, S.C.

Baton Rouge, La.

Nashville, Tenn.

Boston, Mass.

Salt Lake City, Utah

Annapolis, Md.

Olympia, Wash.

Lansing, Mich.

Madison, Wis.

Saint Paul, Minn.

Cheyenne, Wyo.

“Cities that are serious about ramping up sustainability efforts and reducing waste sent to landfills should strongly consider making carton recycling a priority,” said Fantoni. “Carton recycling offers an opportunity for their recycling programs to be more robust, divert more from local landfills and make recycling more convenient for residents.”

Since 2009, the Carton Council has made tremendous progress in growing carton recycling access nationwide, starting at just 18 percent and most recently passing the 53 percent mark. More than 62.4 million households in the U.S. have carton recycling access, with more than 2.8 million of those households residing in capital cities.

“Our goal with this campaign is to work with community leaders and convert as many state capitals into carton communities as possible,” continued Fantoni. “And in doing so, we can demonstrate to other communities that the process is easy, creating a domino effect that can make a long lasting impact on recycling rates across the country.”

About the Carton Council: The Carton Council is composed of four carton manufacturers, Elopak, SIG Combibloc, Evergreen Packaging and Tetra Pak, as well as an associate member, Weyerhaeuser. Formed in 2009, the Carton Council works to deliver long-term collaborative solutions in order to divert valuable cartons from the landfill. Through a united effort, the Carton Council is committed to building a sustainable infrastructure for carton recycling nationwide and works toward their continual goal of adding access to carton recycling throughout the US. For more information, visit CartonOpportunities.org.

ERI Chairman & CEO Gives Talk on Best Practices in Electronic Waste for Wharton Initiative for Global Environmental Leadership

John Shegerian, Chairman and CEO of Electronic Recyclers International (ERI), the nation’s leading recycler of electronic waste, presented on the subject of best practices in the handling of electronic waste at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.

Invited to present by the Wharton Initiative for Global Environmental Leadership (IGEL), Shegerian discussed how through innovation and a commitment to sustainability, ERI has successfully developed solutions to the growing issue of effectively and responsibly recycling electronic waste. He also shared best practices in waste management for devices and equipment that is no longer useful as technology but can be toxic if simply dumped into landfills. 

In the talk, which took place at Wharton’s Jon M. Huntsman Hall, Shegerian also discussed ERI’s and IGEL’s recent announcement that the two entities have engaged in an open knowledge exchange regarding sustainability, industry and community leadership.

With a program committed to cultivating innovation, IGEL promotes knowledge for business sustainability through world-class research and an open dialogue between academic, corporate, government and non-government organizations.

“Working with John Shegerian and the team at ERI is rewarding in a number of ways,” said Joanne Spigonardo, Senior Associate Director of Business Development of Wharton’s IGEL. “Not only is our collaboration yielding practical real world results and cutting edge solutions for problems like curbing the glut of e-waste entering our waste stream, but the relationship also opens the door to information exchanges such as today’s insightful talk from John right here at Wharton.”

“It’s been an honor and a privilege to be able to share our experience with the great brain trust at IGEL here at the legendary Wharton School,” said Shegerian. “Based on our shared commitment to sustainability and the preservation of natural resources, we have formed an instant connection that is sure to fuel positive change. I applaud Joanne and the team at IGEL for constantly engaging the faculty and student populations here, and the world at large, with forward-looking seminars and programs such as this one.”

Shegerian will also appear as a guest expert discussing electronic waste recycling on the “Knowledge@Wharton” segment featured on Sirius Wharton Radio.

For more information on recycling needs, visit www.electronicrecyclers.com, http://1800recycling.com, or http://greenisgoodradio.com.

SPLC Summit to Kick Off Development of a Rating System for Sustainable Purchasing

Since its inception in the summer of 2013, the members and staff of the Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council have produced a number of valuable resources for the sustainable purchasing movement. Last year, they released Principles for Leadership in Sustainable Purchasing v1.0. This February, they released Guidance for Leadership in Sustainable Purchasing v1.0, a 200-page handbook that organizations in any sector can use to build a strategic Sustainable Purchasing Program. Both of those resources are available to the public as free downloads.

With the release of Guidance v1.0, the Council launched a Pilot Program through which 100 organizations with over $200b in purchasing power are now using in the real world. A number of Pilot participants will be sharing insights from their use of Guidance v1.0 at the Council’s 2015 Summit in Seattle, Washington, May 27-28. The Summit program will feature training on the guidance, as well as opportunities for attendees to give feedback.

Most exciting of all, the 2015 Summit will kick off the next step in the Council’s work: the development of SPLC’s Rating System for Leadership in Sustainable Purchasing v1.0. When released for pilot in 2016, the rating system will provide a self-assessment framework, benchmarking, and optional leadership recognition for organizations operating a Sustainable Purchasing Program.

The Rating System will use Guidance v1.0 as a foundation, building upon it with the knowledge and experiences gained through the Pilot Program. But many questions about the rating system are currently unanswered: for example, what should be the duration of recognition? Which requirements of the system should be mandatory, and for whom, and why? And finally, how do we deal with the diversity of purchasing organizations, and still create a scalable, usable system?

All of these questions will be discussed during a Rating System Development workshop on the second day of SPLC’s 2015 Summit. After an opening presentation from Chris Pyke, Vice President of Research for the U.S. Green Building Council, the workshop will include breakout sessions during which Summit participants will be able to weigh in on these important design questions.

The kickoff of the rating system caps two full days of interactive workshops at the Summit. The workshops themselves are structured around the different sections of the Council’s Guidance v1.0, and feature trainings and case study presentations from more than 60 sustainable purchasing leaders.

The 2015 Summit will build on the well-reviewed 2014 Summit in Washington, DC. When asked about last year’s Summit, Karen Cook of Alameda County said, “The SPLC Summit provided a rich environment for learning from peers, expanding networks, and deepening connections for collaboration.”

A new addition to this year’s Summit agenda is SPLC Connect, an afternoon buyer-supplier matchmaking event organized the day before the Summit (May 26) in the same location. Conceived of and organized by leading SPLC Purchaser members, this event is unique because sustainability-savvy purchasers will be vetting all the participating suppliers to ensure that buyers will find truly innovative solutions, and no greenwash.

Learn about the Council’s Guidance for Leadership in Sustainable Purchasing:

https://www.sustainablepurchasing.org/guidance

APR's Plastics Recycling Web Seminar Education Series

APR logoThe APR Educational Webinar Program has proven to be a highly effective and cost efficient way to communicate directly with solid waste and recycling officials, a wide variety of industry members, as well as the general public.  With continued growth in attendance, the 2015 series has been expanded to include five presentations, with a 6th webinar to be announced in the coming months.

Tuesday, May 12, 2015 at 1:00 pm EST

The Sort for Value Online Calculator: An APR Pricing Tool Creating More Value for MRF’s

China's Operation Green Fence policy sent many MRF operators searching for alternative markets for mixed plastic bales. Fortunately, many found domestic plastic reclaimers interested in purchasing non-bottle rigid plastic material. Although specific sorting by the MRF may be necessary to access some domestic markets, the additional sorting may well result in additional revenue.  The Sort for Value Online Calculator has been developed as a tool that calculates the economic value of sorting recyclable rigid plastics. This webinar will review the methodology used in developing the calculator, and provide an explanation on how MRFs can use the tool to better understand the potential value of their rigid plastic stream.

June 23, 2015 at 1:00 pm EST

APR Resources to Support Domestic Plastic Recycling Markets

At APR, our goal is to increase the amount of material available for recycling.  One of the ways we do this is by working to provide the tools to increase public and industry awareness of plastics recycling, expand opportunities to recycle plastics, and reduce contamination.   This webinar will detail a variety of resources available to the industry and general public to support the expansion of domestic plastic recycling markets and generate more supply - including a new and improved Plastic Recycling Market Information and Services Directory, Model Bale Specifications, FAQs, Sorting for Value, as well as an outline of Plastics Recycling Outreach and Commodity Terms used by the industry to reduce consumer confusion regarding what is recyclable.

August 11, 2015 at 1:00 pm EST

What Really Goes in that Bale?  An overview of the 2015 National Mixed Rigid Bale Composition Study

The 2015 National Mixed Rigid Bale Composition Study was conducted categorized the composition of the various types of mixed rigid plastic bales generated in North America, in addition to providing an estimate of the volume and type of non-bottle rigid plastic available for recycling. Making more accurate estimates of the types, volume and destination of rigid plastics currently recycled, and understanding the type and tonnage of rigid plastic available in North America, will strengthen and advance non-bottle rigid recycling. This webinar will provide an executive summary of the full study and report. 

September 15, 2015 at 1:00 pm EST

Foam Recycling 101: PS and EPS

Polystyrene, or foam, is commonly used in food service packaging, sports and safety equipment, insulating, and a variety of product packaging.  This material can be recycled, and this webinar will detail the process and address frequently asked questions and foam collection and reprocessing.

 October 27, 2015 at 1:00 pm EST

Keep the Caps On: Solving the Caps Conundrum - 2015 Update

Due to an ever growing demand for material by plastic reclaimers, APR continues to support the “Caps On” message.  Historically, the perception was the best way to recycle a plastic bottle is with the cap off. Today, with growing markets for HDPE and PP, coupled with improved recycling technology, plastic recyclers support keeping the cap on for reclamation.  Many communities have already updated their messaging to adapt to the new industry standard, and the plastic recycling industry is eager to help communities explore how best to recover as much plastic as possible.  This web seminar will give an update on initiative, address the common concerns surrounding the change, and provide resources to those communities to support this message.

Due to an ever growing demand for material by plastic reclaimers, APR continues to support the “Caps On” message.  Historically, the perception was the best way to recycle a plastic bottle is with the cap off. Today, with growing markets for HDPE and PP, coupled with improved recycling technology, plastic recyclers support keeping the cap on for reclamation.  Many communities have already updated their messaging to adapt to the new industry standard, and the plastic recycling industry is eager to help communities explore how best to recover as much plastic as possible.  This web seminar will give an update on initiative, address the common concerns surrounding the change, and provide resources to those communities to support this message.

OF GENERAL INTEREST

Adding Repair to the Reuse Movement through Legislation

Repair is Right

The average household in the US currently owns approximately 24 digital devices including cell phones, personal computers, HD TVs, gaming consoles, major appliances, e-readers, home energy systems, and even digital door locks.   More digital products enter our lives every day.  Repair of these gadgets and appliances is often intentionally limited by the manufacturer.   Repair can be a lucrative business – and it is more profitable without competition. 

Reuse, enabled by repair, is one of the best ways to keep electronics out of the waste stream. Yet many people do not realize that the electronics they have purchased may come with limitations on repair that allow the manufacturer to control how, when, where, and even if, the product can be fixed. This is not an accident. Manufacturers can easily make a hefty profit on repair if they don’t have any competition.  Worse, from a re-use perspective – repair pricing is easily manipulated to force replacement product sales – as anyone that has owned a mobile phone has probably experienced.

This lack of competition for repair adds unnecessary cost to consumers, business, industry, and government operations.  Monopolies for digital electronic equipment repair have exactly the same negative impacts as monopolies for any other product:

  • Prices go up
  • Service quality goes down
  • Repair is less convenient or available
  • Innovation stalls (Competition drives excellence and creativity)

Repair availability and pricing is the dominant driver in consumer decisions to buy replacements. Most of us keep our consumer electronics and home appliances until some event, usually a breakdown, causes us to consider repair or replacement.  If repair is too costly, then the product is thrown away – ideally for recycling or under an extended producer takeback program, but most often into the trash.

Reuse, as an option, should be encouraged and not thwarted.  Reuse has been a viable option for digital electronic products since the dawn of the computer age.  The products themselves have become smaller and more powerful, but the hardware itself is still hardware. The only differences between products that can be legally repaired and those that are illegal to repair are marketing policies and not technological.   Many of the policies that block repair are themselves close to being illegal under anti-trust law.  

Right to Repair

Fortunately for consumers, state legislators have the ability to stop manufacturers from impeding repair.  Once repair is restored as a legal function for products that happen to contain digital electronic parts, more consumers will be able to keep their products in use, buy fewer compulsory replacements, and keep their purchases out of the waste stream.   We should all be free to keep our things as long as we like – without the manufacturer telling us we must buy a replacement.

Voters in Massachusetts started the ball rolling three years ago when they demanded legislators pass the first Automotive Right to Repair law in the nation.   The same principles apply to repair of everything else made with a computerized part - but the Auto R2R Bill was limited strictly to motor vehicles.  This limitation is being lifted through very similar legislation currently active in Massachusetts, New York, and Minnesota under “Fair Repair” bills.

These bills require manufacturers in general to be as open to independent repair as the big auto makers are now agreed to provide in support of local car mechanics.  The information and materials needed for repair of modern motor vehicles is identical to the repair of other forms of digital electronic products that happen to be in different shapes or sizes.