Open Collections

UBC Undergraduate Research

Best practices for curbside organic waste collection in Powell River, BC Rosen, Noah 2013-05

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
52966-Rosen_Noah_GEOG_419_2013.pdf [ 309.33kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 52966-1.0075653.json
JSON-LD: 52966-1.0075653-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 52966-1.0075653-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 52966-1.0075653-rdf.json
Turtle: 52966-1.0075653-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 52966-1.0075653-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 52966-1.0075653-source.json
Full Text
52966-1.0075653-fulltext.txt
Citation
52966-1.0075653.ris

Full Text

Submitted By: Noah Rosen Best Practices for Curbside Organic Waste Collection in Powell River, BC May 2013 Report prepared at the request of BHC Consulting in partial fulfillment of UBC Geog 419: Research in Environmental Geography, for Dr. David Brownstein Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 1
 Table of Contents
   Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 1
 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 3
 Learning From Others ...................................................................................................................................... 4
Best
Practices
.........................................................................................................................................................................................
4 Design
Variables
...................................................................................................................................................................................
4 Case
Studies
............................................................................................................................................................................................
6 Ladysmith
...........................................................................................................................................................................................
6
Prince
Edward
Island
....................................................................................................................................................................
7
 Learning From Powell River .......................................................................................................................... 8
Survey
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
8 




Analysis
............................................................................................................................................................................................
10





Conclusions
.....................................................................................................................................................................................
10
Meetings
................................................................................................................................................................................................
11  Recommendations .......................................................................................................................................... 12
Communication
..................................................................................................................................................................................
12 Universal
Service
Provision
..........................................................................................................................................................
12 High
Diversion
Rate
..........................................................................................................................................................................
13 Moving
Forward
.................................................................................................................................................................................
13  Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................ 14
Appendix
1‐Survey
of
Powell
River
Residents
.....................................................................................................................
14  Sources ............................................................................................................................................................... 16
       Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 2
 Executive Summary    Recommendations  Communication I
recommend
scheduled
meetings
take
place
immediately
between
the
Regional
District
and
the
City
structured
around
the
city’s
need
to
purchase
a
new
garbage
collection
truck
in
the
coming
months.
This
will
act
as
a
meaningful
deadline
that
will
drive
dialogue,
compromise,
and
decisions.
 Universal Service Provision I
recommend
universal
service
provision:
all
residents
of
the
Powell
River
Regional
District,
urban
and
rural,
should
be
able
to
divert
their
organic
waste
from
the
landfill.  High Diversion Rate Achieved
through:

 • Mandatory
organic
waste
diversion,
either
through
backyard
composting
or
participation
in
the
curbside
program

 • The
provision
of
kitchen
and
curbside
bins

 • A
reduced
organic
waste
disposal
rate
 • Extensive
education
campaign

These
recommendations—communication,
universal
service
provision,
and
a
high
diversion
rate
achieved
through
mandatory
organic
waste
diversion,
the
provision
of
collection
bins,
a
reduced
organic
waste
disposal
rate,
an
education
campaign,
and
monitoring
and
adaptation
of
the
program,
will
bring
the
Powell
River
Regional
District
and
the
City
of
Powell
River
together
to
plan
and
operate
a
successful
organic
waste
diversion
program,
creating
a
more
economically
and
environmentally
sustainable
community,
and
leading
the
area
one
step
closer
to
the
realization
of
the
Powell
River
Sustainability
Charter.


 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 3
 Introduction The
Powell
River
Sustainability
Charter
states
that
the
region
“is
making
a
sustainable
future
its
priority.”1
In
order
to
meet
both
its
current
and
future
demand
for
energy,
resources,
and
land,
Powell
River
must
tackle
a
host
of
issues—from
land
use
to
energy
consumption
to
waste
management.
This
report
focuses
on
the
latter—specifically,
organic
waste
management.


Organic
waste—kitchen
and
yard
waste—makes
up
more
than
40%
of
municipal
solid
waste
(MSW).2
Currently,
Powell
River
sends
this
waste
to
landfill
in
Washington
State3,
an
economically
and
environmentally
unsustainable
practice.
Given
its
significant
proportion
of
MSW,
diverting
organic
waste
from
the
landfill
by
composting
or
anaerobic
biodigestion
will
drastically
reduce
its
ecological
impact
in
terms
of
methane
emissions,
ground
water
contamination,
CO2
emissions
from
transportation,
and
area
required
for
landfill.
Powell
River
recognized
the
benefits
of
organic
waste
diversion
in
its
most
recent
solid
waste
management
plan
with
the
adoption
of
a
“Working
Towards
Zero”
waste
management
policy
in
its
efforts
to
become
a
sustainable
community.

Net
Zero
Waste
and
Upland
Consulting
advanced
progress
in
June
2012
with
a
feasibility
analysis
of
an
organic
processing
facility
for
the
collected
waste.4
In
September
2012,
Powell
River
Regional
District
Resolution
M‐9.2
cemented
the
broad
goals
of
waste
diversion,
reduction,
and
elimination
in
the
Sustainability
Charter
with
a
timeline
for
the
design
and
implementation
of
a
curbside
organic
waste
collection
program.
This
timeline
specified
meetings
between
the
Regional
District
and
the
City
of
Powell
River
in
the
fall
of
2012,
and
an
education
campaign
was
supposed
to
roll
out
spring
2013.5
The
timeline
is
currently
behind
schedule.
This
report
focuses
on
strategies
for
cooperation
between
the
Regional
District
and
the
municipality
that
will
make
organic
waste
diversion
a
reality
in
Powell
River.
 Methods A
review
of
existing
literature
and
case
studies
regarding
organic
waste
management,
an
analysis
of
a
survey
of
Powell
River
residents’
views
of
curbside
organic
waste
collection,
and
a
summary
























































1
A
Sustainability
Charter
for
the
Powell
River
Region,
6.
2
Valdivia,
J.
E.
(2010).

Organic waste management in Manitoba, Canada: Barriers and opportunities to implement best‐ practices (Master’s
thesis).
Retrieved
from

3
Net
Zero
Waste.
(2012).
“Organic
Prcessing
Feasibility
Analysis:
Final
Report.”

4
Net
Zero
Waste.
(2012).
“Organic
Processing
Feasibility
Analysis:
Final
Report.”

5
Powell
River
Regional
District
Resolution
M‐9.2,
September
19,
2013.
 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 4
 of
meetings
with
local
authorities.
A
research
trip
to
Powell
River
was
made
possible
by
a
grant
from
the
Community
Based
Experiential
Learning
office
at
the
University
of
British
Columbia.
These
methods
lead
to
recommendations
for
best
practices
for
organic
waste
collection
and
collaboration
between
the
Powell
River
Regional
District
and
the
City
of
Powell
River
in
the
design,
implementation,
and
operation
of
a
curbside
organic
waste
collection
program.

 Learning From Others Many
cities
across
the
world
have
implemented
curbside
organic
waste
collection
programs
in
various
ways,
with
various
levels
of
success.
Studying
the
lessons
learned
from
these
experiences
will
allow
the
Powell
River
region
to
avoid
complications
encountered
by
other
organic
waste
collection
programs,
and
provide
the
opportunity
to
include
tried
and
true
design
elements
in
a
new
program
We
will
first
examine
general
best
practices
and
design
variables
for
organic
waste
management
found
in
the
existing
literature.
We
then
turn
to
an
analysis
of
specific
case
studies.
 Best Practices  General
organic
waste
management
best
practices
found
in
the
existing
literature
include6:

 • Implementation
of
an
integrated
solid
waste
management
(ISWM)
strategy
and
waste
diversion
targets
 o ISWM
involves
“an
optimized
collection
program;
appropriate
recycling;
biological
treatment
of
organic
material;
thermal
treatment
(waste‐to‐energy)
of
waste
that
cannot
be
diverted;
and
finally
the
landfilling
of
residuals”.7
 • Cooperative
approach
to
waste
management
among
all
levels
of
government,
industry,
and
other
stakeholders
 • Funding
allocation
required
to
separate,
collect,
and
process
organic
waste
 Design Variables Organic
waste
management
concerns
the
separation,
collection,
transport,
and
processing
of
kitchen
and
yard
waste.
How
that
is
achieved
varies
widely.
Understanding
the
design
variables
of
a
curbside
organic
waste
collection
program
is
the
first
step
in
designing
a
new
program.
























































6
Valdivia,
iv.
7
Stauch,
A.M.
(2012).
“Curbside
Organic
Waste
Collection
&
The
60%
Waste
Diversion
Goal:
A
Case
Study
of
Select
Municipalities
in
the
Greater
Golden
Horseshoe.”
Unpublished
Master’s
thesis,
School
of
Planning,
University
of
Waterloo,
Waterloo.
12.

 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 5
 Important
design
variables
of
a
curbside
organic
waste
collection
program
include:8

 • What
is
the
program’s
goal:
a
specific
diversion
target
or
balancing
diversion
and
cost?
 • Is
the
program
optional
or
mandatory?
 • Will
the
program
accept
co‐mingled
kitchen
and
yard
waste?
 • Are
kitchen/curbside
bins
provided?

 • Collection
frequency
 • Day
of
collection
 • Location/method
of
processing

 • Education
campaign
 • Financial
incentives/disincentives

Using
recycling
programs
as
a
proxy
for
organics
programs,
we
can
generalize
the
effects
of
these
design
variables
on
participation:9

 • Mandatory
programs
are
more
successful
than
voluntary
programs

 • Enforcement
policies
further
increase
participation
 • Voluntary
programs
can
achieve
high
participation
rates
with
the
provision
of
free
collection
bins
 • Education
campaigns
and
financial
incentives
significantly
increase
participation
 • Frequent
collection
on
the
same
day
as
garbage
collection
appears
to
increase
participation
 • A
participation
mandate
is
more
effective
in
small
communities
than
in
large
cities
 • Mandated
programs
are
not
significantly
affected
by
a
waste
segregation
requirement
 • Voluntary
programs
requiring
segregated
collection
have
less
participation
than
voluntary
programs
that
accept
co‐mingled
waste.

One
case
study
from
England
analyzes
the
success
of
an
education
campaign.
Researchers
found
that
face‐to‐face
contact
greatly
increased
participation
rates
in
the
program.
They
argue
that
“Once
the
householder
makes
a
commitment
on
a
face‐to‐face
level
he:
she
is
more
inclined
to
carry
out
that
pledge”10.
They
also
note
that
public
engagement
is
not
discrete,
but
rather
must
 























































8
Noehammer,
H.C.,
Byer,
P.H.
(1997).
Effect
of
Design
Variables
on
Participation
in
Residential
Curbside
Recycling
Programs,
Waste Management and Research, 15.
408.

9
Noehammer.
411.
10
Read,
A.D.
(1999).
‘‘A
weekly
doorstep
recycling
collection,
I
had
no
idea
we
could!’’
Overcoming
the
local
barriers
to
participation
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 26. 247.
 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 6
 evolve
over
time
so
that
“residents
are
visited
and
revisited
to
maintain
and
refresh
their
interest
and
commitment
.“11
 Lessons for Powell River The
main
takeaways
from
the
existing
organic
waste
management
literature
for
best
practices
and
design
of
a
curbside
organic
waste
collection
program
are:
 • Mandatory
programs
are
more
successful
than
voluntary
programs,
especially
in
small
communities
like
Powell
River
 • Free
bins,
financial
incentives,
and
frequent
collection,
all
increase
participation
 Case Studies   Ladysmith  The
town
of
Ladysmith
in
the
Cowichan
Valley
Regional
District
(CVRD)
on
Vancouver
Island
was
the
first
municipality
in
British
Columbia
to
introduce
a
curbside
organic
waste
collection
program.
Ladysmith’s
population
(~8,000)
is
similar
to
the
City
of
Powell
River
(~13,000).
Furthermore,
Ladysmith’s
leadership
on
organic
waste
collection
came
from
a
zero
waste
goal
adopted
by
the
CVRD,
similar
to
that
adopted
by
the
PRRD.
Given
these
similarities,
lessons
learned
from
Ladysmith
translate
well
Powell
River’s
context.


Although
the
municipality
of
Ladysmith
took
the
lead,
the
program
ultimately
came
to
fruition
through
the
cooperation
between
the
Mayor,
City
Council,
and
City
Manager
of
Ladysmith,
CVRD
staff,
and
the
organic
waste
processing
facility
in
Nanaimo.
This
multilateral
cooperation
exemplifies
the
cooperation
sought
between
the
City
of
Powell
River
and
the
PRRD.
The
city
took
the
lead
in
planning
and
financing
the
program,
while
the
Regional
District
provided
administrative
and
political
support
for
organic
waste
diversion.


Ladysmith
implemented
an
education
campaign
to
educate
residents
about
the
new
program
and
teach
them
what
constituted
‘organic
waste’.
The
town
used
a
range
of
techniques
to
implement
the
education
campaign,
including:
a
booth
at
local
events,
school
presentations,
advertisements,
 























































11
Read,
247.
 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 7
 media
coverage,
posters,
and
flyers12.
Ladysmith’s
extensive
education
campaign
provides
an
excellent
model
that
should
be
mimicked
in
Powell
River.

The
Cowichan
Valley
Regional
District
also
took
an
interest
in
diverting
organic
waste
from
rural
households.
To
do
so,
the
CVRD
provided
free
drop
off
of
organic
waste
at
existing
recycling
centers.
Rural
residents
who
use
the
service
see
the
wide
range
of
material
accepted
at
these
locations
and
become
repeat
users
of
the
service.
This
demonstrates
the
potential
for
organic
waste
diversion
to
increase
diversion
of
other
waste
streams.

Cooperation
between
Ladysmith
and
the
CVRD,
the
availability
of
a
processing
facility,
competitive
pricing,
and
a
comprehensive
education
campaign
ultimately
led
Ladysmith
to
a
successful
program
with
a
60%
diversion
rate.13
Not
only
did
residents
begin
diverting
organic
waste
with
the
new
program;
they
also
increased
traditional
recycling
by
14%.
14
This
demonstrates
the
snowball
effect
that
an
organic
waste
collection
program
can
have,
resulting
from
increased
awareness
of
the
importance
of
waste
management
and
sustainability.

 Lessons for Powell River  • Communication,
monitoring
and
adaption,
and
community
engagement
are
important
throughout
the
process
 • A
comprehensive
education
campaign
engages
the
public
effectively
 • Implementation
and
enforcement
of
mandatory
participation
bylaw
lead
to
high
success
rates
 • Cooperation
between
regional
district
and
municipality
is
fundamental

 Prince Edward Island  Lessons
from
the
province
of
Prince
Edward
Island
(PEI)
can
also
be
applied
to
Powell
River.
Though
it
may
seem
that
the
provincial
scale
does
not
translate
to
Powell
River,
PEI’s
small,
relatively
isolated
population
provides
a
nice
parallel
to
that
of
Powell
River.
Furthermore,
PEI’s
Canadian
context
translates
to
Powell
River
better
than
programs
rooted
in
American
policies.

 























































12
Curbside
Organic
Waste
Collection
in
Ladysmith.

13
Ladysmith.
Organics,
Recycling,
and
Garbage.
14
Curbside
Organic
Waste
Collection
in
Ladysmith.
 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 8
 Like
Ladysmith,
PEI
mandates
that
residents
separate
organic
waste
and
contracts
with
private
service
providers
for
its
collection.15
Previous
voluntary
programs
in
the
province
resulted
in
less
than
10%
diversion.
The
current
mandatory
program
surpasses
60%
diversion.16






























A
report
on
the
program’s
success
reveals:
“It
was
‘very
painful’
at
the
beginning,
but
[the
Province
is]
glad
they
decided
to
mandate
the
program
instead
of
making
it
voluntary.”17
An
ongoing
education
campaign
includes
“on‐line
sorting
guides,
a
bi‐annual
collection
calendar,
and
regular
newspaper
articles
[and
an]
annual
report.”18
These
community
engagement
methods
all
require
residents
to
intentionally
seek
out
the
information.
Ladysmith’s
more
accessible
education
campaign
would
likely
be
more
successful
in
Powell
River.
Though
the
PEI
program
is
mandatory,
education
remains
important
to
maximize
participation
and
minimize
contamination.

 Lessons for Powell River  • A
source
separation
mandate
increases
diversion
rate
 • Active
community
engagement
remains
important
throughout
the
program’s
lifetime

These
lessons
from
other
communities
will
help
guide
Powell
River
on
the
path
to
organic
waste
diversion.
These
lessons
must
be
applied
to
Powell
River’s
local
context.
 Learning From Powell River  Learning
from
others
allows
us
to
avoid
past
mistakes
and
capitalize
on
lessons
learned.
Knowledge
accumulates
with
experience.
However,
Powell
River
has
unique
characteristics
that
must
be
considered
when
planning
a
curbside
organic
waste
collection
program.

 Survey How
do
the
people
of
Powell
River
envision
organic
waste
diversion?
What
are
their
concerns?
A
survey
(Appendix
1)
was
administered
to
54
residents
to
answer
these
important
questions.
The
limited
scope
of
this
project
resulted
in
a
small
sample
size.
However,
the
survey
represents
the
first
attempt
at
community
engagement
regarding
organic
waste
diversion
in
Powell
River.
The
 























































15
Skumatz,
L.A.,
Freeman,
D.,
Gordon,
S.
(2007).
NORTH AMERICAN WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS COMPARISON  STUDY: OUTSTANDING COMMUNITIES AND PROGRAMS IN NORTH AMERICA & BEYOND. 43.

16
Skumatz,
L.A.,
Freeman,
D.,
Gordon,
S.,
43.
17
Skumatz,
L.A.,
Freeman,
D.,
Gordon,
S.,
43.
18
Skumatz,
L.A.,
Freeman,
D.,
Gordon,
S.,
43.
 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 9
 survey
results,
summarized
below
in
Figure
1,
provide
a
preliminary
indication
of
public
opinion
regarding
organic
waste
collection.

 
 Figure 1: Survey Results 
 Curbside Organic Waste Collection in Powell River Below are the preliminary results for the Powell River Curbside Organic Waste Collection survey, administered Friday February 22, 2013 at the Mall, the Recreation Complex, and the Film Festival to 54 residents of the Powell River Regional District. Values are rounded to the nearest percent. 1. Where do you live? 2. Do you currently compost your organic waste? Yes No 3. If you live in the City of Powell River, would you participate in a voluntary organic waste collection program if curbside and kitchen collection bins were provided? Yes No I don’t live in the City Yes No 6. Current garbage bag rates are $2/bag. Would you take the time to separate your kitchen and yard waste for a reduceed rate? Yes No 7. Would you support bi-weekly garbage collection, alternating between weekly recycling and organics collection? Yes No 8. Would you support compost collection in the municipality? 4. If you live in the City of Powell River, would you participate in a voluntary organic waste collection program if curbside and kitchen collection bins were not provided? Yes No I don’t live in the City 5. If you live in a rural area, would you voluntarily separate your kitchen and yard waste and transport it to a transfer station? Yes No I don’t live in a R.A. City of Powell River 72% Rural Area 28% 74% 26% 85% 11% 76% 19% 91% 10% 57% 15% 28% 37% 33% 28% 22% 16% 61% Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 10
 Analysis What
can
we
learn
from
these
results?

First,
almost
75%
of
both
rural
and
municipal
residents
reported
that
they
already
compost
their
organic
waste.
As
the
cheapest
and
most
localized
option
for
organic
waste
diversion,
backyard
composting
is
the
ideal
scenario.
Many
residents
were
reluctant
to
give
up
their
compost
for
their
garden
to
a
centralized
collection
program.
So,
a
mandatory
curbside
organic
waste
program
would
be
unlikely
to
gain
broad
support
in
Powell
River,
unless
backyard
composted
was
included
in
the
bylaw.

27.6%
of
municipal
residents
who
currently
compost
would
not
participate
in
a
voluntary
program
if
bins
were
included.
At
the
same
time,
100%
of
municipal
residents
who
do
not
compost
reported
that
they
would
participate
in
such
a
program
if
bins
were
provided.
This
translates
to
20.5%
of
all
municipality
respondents
who
would
not
participate,
resulting
in
a
theoretical
maximum
participation
rate
of
79.5%.

Significantly
fewer
respondents
indicated
they
would
participate
in
a
voluntary
program
if
bins
were
not
included.
Of
those
municipal
residents
who
do
compost,
only
51.7%
indicated
they
would
participate
if
no
bins
were
provided,
compared
to
the
69%
that
would
participate
if
bins
were
provided.
Similarly,
only
40%
of
municipal
respondents
who
do
not
compost
indicated
that
they
would
participate
if
bins
were
not
provided,
compared
to
the
100%
that
would
participate
if
bins
were
provided.

 Conclusions  These
results
yield
two
interesting
conclusions.
First,
the
provision
of
kitchen
and
curbside
collection
bins
would
significantly
increase
participation
rates
in
the
City
of
Powell
River.
Unless
households
frequently
set
out
organic
waste
in
small
containers,
a
system
that
includes
curbside
bins
requires
an
automated
or
semi‐automated
truck
that
can
lift
the
heavy
bins.
Second,
the
lack
of
bins
reduces
the
participation
of
respondents
who
do
not
currently
compost
more
than
that
of
respondents
who
do
currently
compost.
This
suggests
initial
capital
investment
is
a
significant
barrier
to
entry
for
households.

A
higher
percentage
of
respondents
who
do
and
do
not
currently
compost
indicated
they
would
separate
their
organic
waste
for
a
reduced
disposal
rate
than
would
participate
in
a
program
that
 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 11
 did
provide
kitchen
and
curbside
bins.
This
suggests
that
reduced
cost
over
the
long
term
is
a
more
significant
driver
of
participation
than
reduced
initial
costs
with
the
provision
of
bins.

 Lessons for Powell River Key
lessons
for
Powell
River
from
the
survey
results
are:
 • A
high
percentage
(~75%)
of
residents
already
compost
their
organic
waste
 • Provision
of
collection
bins
impacts
participation
of
non‐composters
more
so
than
that
of
current
composters
 • Reduced
waste
disposal
rate
significantly
increases
participation
of
both
current
composters
and
non‐composters,
more
so
than
the
provision
of
collection
bins
 Meetings On
February
22,
2013,
I
met
with
Sean
McGinn,
Manager
of
Community
Services
for
the
Powell
River
Regional
District,
and
Tor
Birtig,
Director
of
Infrastructure
for
the
City
of
Powell
River.
Key
outcomes
from
these
separate
meetings
were:
 • Mr.
Birtig’s
desire
for
cost
sharing
between
the
Regional
District
and
the
City
 • Mr.
Birtig’s
need
to
purchase
new
garbage
trucks
in
the
coming
months

 o The
type
of
truck—manual
vs.
automatic—dictates
system
design—bins
vs.
bags
 o Thus,
decisions
must
be
made
regarding
system
design,
and
therefore,
financing

 • Mr.
McGinn’s
concern
regarding
uneven
service
provision—rural
residents
should
not
finance
a
municipal
service

 • Mr.
McGinn’s
willingness
to
arrange
contracts
for
the
new
program

 • Both
parties’
desire
to
export
organic
waste
first,
then
monitor
diversion
levels
to
determine
feasibility
of
a
local
processing
facility
The
desires
of
both
the
Regional
District
and
the
City
of
Powell
River
expressed
in
these
meetings
need
to
be
balanced
when
planning
and
financing
the
curbside
organic
waste
collection
program.
How?
By
synthesizing
lessons
from
others’
experience
with
curbside
organic
waste
collection
with
Powell
River’s
local
context,
the
following
section
presents
three
concrete
recommendations
that
will
facilitate
cooperation
between
the
Powell
River
Regional
District
and
the
City
of
Powell
River
in
planning
and
operating
a
successful
organic
waste
diversion
program.




 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 12
 Recommendations  A
review
of
the
organic
waste
management
literature,
two
case
studies,
a
survey
of
residents
of
Powell
River,
and
conversations
with
Powell
River
authorities
led
to
the
following
best
practice
recommendations
for
achieving
successful
curbside
collection
of
organic
materials
by
the
Powell
River
Regional
District
and
the
City
of
Powell
River:
 • Communication  • Universal Service Provision  • High Diversion Rate  Communication A
common
goal
unites
the
different
interests
of
the
Regional
District
and
the
Municipality:
more
economically
and
environmentally
sustainable
waste
management.
The
realization
of
that
goal
requires
effective
communication.
To
date,
there
has
been
limited
communication
between
the
Regional
District
and
the
City
on
co‐creating
an
organics
diversion
strategy.
Powell
River
Regional
District
Resolution
M‐9.2
states
that
discussions
should
have
started
in
the
fall
of
2012.
These
discussions
have
not
yet
happened,
rendering
the
current
plan
behind
schedule.
Thus,
I
recommend
scheduled
meetings
take
place
immediately
between
the
Regional
District
and
the
City
structured
around
the
city’s
need
to
purchase
a
new
garbage
collection
truck
in
the
coming
months.
This
will
act
as
a
meaningful
deadline
that
will
drive
dialogue,
compromise,
and
decisions.
 Universal Service Provision Mr.
McGinn
expressed
concern
regarding
uneven
levels
of
service
for
rural
and
urban
residents.
Thus,
I
recommend
universal
service
provision:
all
residents
of
the
Powell
River
Regional
District,
urban
and
rural,
should
be
able
to
divert
their
organic
waste
from
the
landfill.
This
recommendation
follows
from
the
CVRD
example.
Rural
residents
may
drop
off
organic
waste
free
of
charge
at
existing
transfer
stations.
Rural
organic
waste
can
then
be
mixed
with
urban
organic
waste
and
transferred
to
a
processing
facility.
Universal
service
provision
provides
two
significant
benefits
for
the
Powell
River
area.
First,
the
sharing
of
infrastructure
by
the
Regional
District
and
the
City—central
collection
bins
and
organic
waste
hauling
and
processing
contracts—will
facilitate
communication
and
cooperation
between
the
two
political
bodies.
Second,
both
the
Regional
District
and
the
City
will
have
a
direct
interest
in
planning
and
running
a
successful
 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 13
 program,
as
both
urban
and
rural
residents
will
use
the
service.
This
leads
to
my
third
and
final
recommendation—what
makes
an
organic
waste
diversion
program
successful?

 High Diversion Rate An
organic
waste
diversion
program
is
only
economically
sustainable
if
it
achieves
a
high
diversion
rate.
The
literature
review
and
survey
of
Powell
River
residents
led
me
to
the
following
recommendations
for
a
high
diversion
rate
in
Powell
River:
 • Mandatory
organic
waste
diversion,
either
through
backyard
composting
or
participation
in
the
curbside
program

 • The
provision
of
kitchen
and
curbside
bins

 • A
reduced
organic
waste
disposal
rate
 • Extensive
education
campaign

These
policies
will
provide
a
mix
of
carrots
and
sticks
that
will
lead
to
the
highest
possible
diversion
rate.
The
recommendations
do
require
significant
investment
in
collection
bins
and
a
semi‐automated
truck.
However,
reduced
cost
over
the
long
term
through
more
efficient
waste
collection
and
local
processing
of
organic
waste
justifies
the
initial
investment.

 Moving Forward Local
processing
of
organic
waste
is
the
most
economically
and
environmentally
sustainable
scenario.
However,
a
processing
facility
requires
a
minimum
volume
to
operate
successfully.
Thus,
once
the
organic
waste
diversion
program
is
implemented,
the
Regional
District
and
the
City
should
monitor
diversion
rates
to
determine
the
feasibility
of
a
local
organic
waste
processing
facility.
Collection
of
commercial
organic
waste—supermarkets,
restaurants,
etc.—should
also
be
considered
to
augment
local
organic
waste
volumes
to
justify
local
processing.
Monitoring
will
allow
for
adaptation
and
expansion
to
maximize
the
diversion
of
organic
waste
from
landfill.

These
recommendations—communication,
universal
service
provision,
and
a
high
diversion
rate
achieved
through
mandatory
organic
waste
diversion,
the
provision
of
collection
bins,
a
reduced
organic
waste
disposal
rate,
an
education
campaign,
and
monitoring
and
adaptation
of
the
program,
will
bring
the
Powell
River
Regional
District
and
the
City
of
Powell
River
together
to
plan
and
operate
a
successful
organic
waste
diversion
program,
creating
a
more
economically
and
environmentally
sustainable
community,
and
leading
the
area
one
step
closer
to
the
realization
of
the
Powell
River
Sustainability
Charter.

 Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 14
 Appendix  Appendix 1‐Survey of Powell River Residents  
 
 Curbside Organic Waste Collection in Powell River 2. Do you currently compost your organic waste? Yes No 3. If you live in the City of Powell River, would you participate in a voluntary organic waste collection program if curbside and kitchen collection bins were provided? Yes No I don’t live in the City Yes No 6. Current garbage bag rates are $2/bag. Would you take the time to separate your kitchen and yard waste for a reduceed rate? Yes No 7. Would you support bi-weekly garbage collection, alternating between weekly recycling and organics collection? Yes No 8. Would you support compost collection in the municipality? 4. If you live in the City of Powell River, would you participate in a voluntary organic waste collection program if curbside and kitchen collection bins were not provided? Yes No I don’t live in the City 5. If you live in a rural area, would you voluntarily separate your kitchen and yard waste and transport it to a transfer station? Yes No I don’t live in a R.A. (over       ) The Powell River Curbside Organic Waste Collection term project is being conducted as part of Geography 419: Research in Environmental Geography, a course at the University of British Columbia. Noah Rosen is conducting research on behalf of BHC Consulting. He is exploring best practices for cooperation between the City of Powell River and the Powell River Regional District for the implementation of a curbside organic waste collection program. 1. Where do you live? City of Powell River Rural Area ‘A’   Rural Area ‘B’   Rural Area ‘C’   Rural Area ‘D’    Rural Area ‘E’ Comment Comment Comment Comment Comment Comment Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 15
 
 Do you have any additional  comments, suggestions, or recommendations regarding curbside organic waste collection in the City and Regional District of Powell River? If so, please share your thoughts below. Thank you for your time. We value your input in a sustainable future for Powell River. If you have any questions regarding waste management in Powell River, please visit letstalktrashpr.com Noah
Rosen
‐
UBC
Geography
 16
 Sources   A
Sustainability
Charter
for
the
Powell
River
Region.
(2009).
Retrieved
from
pr.viu.ca/communitysustainability/documents/SustainabilityCharterPowellRiverRegion%20.pdf
Curbside
Organic
Waste
Collection
in
Ladysmith.
http://www.toolkit.bc.ca/success‐story/curbside‐organic‐waste‐collection‐ladysmith

Ladysmith.
Organics,
Recycling,
and
Garbage.
http://www.ladysmith.ca/city‐hall/city‐departments/public‐works/garbage‐recycling‐organic‐waste
 Net
Zero
Waste.
(2012).
“Organic
Processing
Feasibility
Analysis:
Final
Report.”
www.powellriverrd.bc.ca/wp‐content/uploads/NZW‐Final‐Report‐PRRD1.pdf

Noehammer,
H.C.,
Byer,
P.H.
(1997).
Effect
of
Design
Variables
on
Participation
in
Residential
Curbside
Recycling
Programs,
Waste Management and Research, 15.
Retrieved
from
http://wmr.sagepub.com/content/15/4/407.abstract
Powell
River
Regional
District
Resolution
M‐9.2,
September
19,
2013.
www.powellriverrd.bc.ca/wp‐content/uploads/Organics‐Separation‐Action‐Plan.pdf

Read,
A.D.
(1999).
‘‘A
weekly
doorstep
recycling
collection,
I
had
no
idea
we
could!’’
Overcoming
the
local
barriers
to
participation
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 26. Retrieved
from
http://www.journals.elsevier.com/resources‐conservation‐and‐recycling
Skumatz,
L.A.,
Freeman,
D.,
Gordon,
S.
(2007).
NORTH AMERICAN WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS  COMPARISON STUDY: OUTSTANDING COMMUNITIES AND PROGRAMS IN NORTH AMERICA  & BEYOND. Retrieved
from
http://www.serainc.com/Publications_v1.html
Stauch,
A.M.
(2012).
“Curbside
Organic
Waste
Collection
&
The
60%
Waste
Diversion
Goal:
A
Case
Study
of
Select
Municipalities
in
the
Greater
Golden
Horseshoe.”
Unpublished
Master’s
thesis,
School
of
Planning,
University
of
Waterloo,
Waterloo.
Retrieved
from
uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/bitstream/10012/6527/1/Stauch_Aaron.pdf
Valdivia,
J.
E.
(2010).

Organic waste management in Manitoba, Canada: Barriers and opportunities  to implement best‐practices (Master’s
thesis).
Retrieved
from
http://umanitoba.ca/institutes/natural_resources/pdf/theses/Masters%20Thesis%20Valdivia%202011.pdf


Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.52966.1-0075653/manifest

Comment

Related Items