Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Ontario Recycler Workshop November 3, 2005. Welcome!

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Ontario Recycler Workshop November 3, 2005. Welcome!"— Presentation transcript:

1 Ontario Recycler Workshop November 3, 2005

2 Welcome!

3 Introduction  First Ontario Recycler Workshop  Joint initiative of WDO, Stewardship Ontario, AMO  Reflects interests & information needs – Nearly 100 people here in person – More than 30 registered by webcast  Goals for the day – Share E&E Fund project results to date – Encourage more E&E Fund applications – Describe MIPC’s work on Reasonable Cost Bands & its effect on municipal funding allocation – Introduce Knowledge Network & 'What If' Tool  First Ontario Recycler Workshop  Joint initiative of WDO, Stewardship Ontario, AMO  Reflects interests & information needs – Nearly 100 people here in person – More than 30 registered by webcast  Goals for the day – Share E&E Fund project results to date – Encourage more E&E Fund applications – Describe MIPC’s work on Reasonable Cost Bands & its effect on municipal funding allocation – Introduce Knowledge Network & 'What If' Tool

4 Agenda  E&E Fund initiatives in morning – Introduction & update – Selected project profiles big city, urban/northern, financing & communications – Knowledge Network launch slides for webcast plus live for in person  MIPC/WDO initiatives in afternoon – Reasonable Cost Bands – 'What If' tool launch slides for webcast plus live for in person  AMO reception  E&E Fund initiatives in morning – Introduction & update – Selected project profiles big city, urban/northern, financing & communications – Knowledge Network launch slides for webcast plus live for in person  MIPC/WDO initiatives in afternoon – Reasonable Cost Bands – 'What If' tool launch slides for webcast plus live for in person  AMO reception

5 Our Audiences  Webcast audience listening on-line – speakers will refer to slide numbers to prompt you to move to the next slide – two sets of slides morning & afternoon sessions – questions/comments to:  Archived webcast available for 180 days  Webcast audience listening on-line – speakers will refer to slide numbers to prompt you to move to the next slide – two sets of slides morning & afternoon sessions – questions/comments to:  Archived webcast available for 180 days

6 Introduction to the Effectiveness & Efficiency Fund Guy Perry Stewardship Ontario Guy Perry Stewardship Ontario

7  Created by the Waste Diversion Act  Blue box industry funding organization (IFO)  5 year goal of 60% blue box waste diversion  Created by the Waste Diversion Act  Blue box industry funding organization (IFO)  5 year goal of 60% blue box waste diversion Stewardship Ontario

8 Municipal Funding  The Waste Diversion Act (2002): blue box stewards to pay 50% of the net costs of recycling  Total gross recycling costs reported by WDO from 2004 Municipal Datacall increase ~ 6.5% – $182.4M ( for 2005 fees) – $194.4M (for 2006 fees)  2004 net system cost was $120M – less $10M in negotiated cost reductions for ‘06 fees  Municipal transfer for 2006 – $48.6M payment – $1.5M CNA in kind contribution – $5.4M through Effectiveness & Efficiency Fund  The Waste Diversion Act (2002): blue box stewards to pay 50% of the net costs of recycling  Total gross recycling costs reported by WDO from 2004 Municipal Datacall increase ~ 6.5% – $182.4M ( for 2005 fees) – $194.4M (for 2006 fees)  2004 net system cost was $120M – less $10M in negotiated cost reductions for ‘06 fees  Municipal transfer for 2006 – $48.6M payment – $1.5M CNA in kind contribution – $5.4M through Effectiveness & Efficiency Fund

9 Overview of the Effectiveness & Efficiency Fund 10% of industry contribution to municipalities to Effectiveness & Efficiency (“E&E”) Fund – $3.3 million available in first year – $5.7 million for 2005 – $20 million + over 5 year program Objectives: 1. Reduce system cost (net cost per tonne) 2. Minimize future cost increases as recovery increases 10% of industry contribution to municipalities to Effectiveness & Efficiency (“E&E”) Fund – $3.3 million available in first year – $5.7 million for 2005 – $20 million + over 5 year program Objectives: 1. Reduce system cost (net cost per tonne) 2. Minimize future cost increases as recovery increases

10 Application Evaluation  Increased diversion (30 points)  Reduced costs (30 points)  Project management (15 points) – evidence that project is well managed & results will be beneficial  Replicability & communicating results (25 points)  Leverage factor for percentage of funding provided by applicant/others (not scored)  Level of in-kind support by municipality (not scored)  Increased diversion (30 points)  Reduced costs (30 points)  Project management (15 points) – evidence that project is well managed & results will be beneficial  Replicability & communicating results (25 points)  Leverage factor for percentage of funding provided by applicant/others (not scored)  Level of in-kind support by municipality (not scored)

11 Summary of Applications  33 projects approved$5.14M  10 applications in development$3.19M  33 applications rejected/withdrawn$2.84M  76 applications received to date$11.17M  33 projects approved$5.14M  10 applications in development$3.19M  33 applications rejected/withdrawn$2.84M  76 applications received to date$11.17M

12 Summary of Number & Type of Projects Priority Area Number of Projects Project Value % of Total Value MRF Rationalization8$598,72512% Multi-Res Recycling3$1,918,55037% Benchmarking & Waste Audits6$623,00012% Cost Containment7$192,6504% Communication & Education3$1,297,60025% Innovative Financing & Compliance 3$154,2003% Other Projects3$360,0007% Total33$5,145,025100%

13 Year One Accomplishments  13 peer reviewers trained & active; electronic review system working well; Stewardship Ontario Projects Committee in place  Best practices approach in 60% of projects  $4M projects committed to “proactive” priorities  Fund is well known, well-advertised  Strategic investments in multi-family recycling, “best practices,” innovative technology business cases  13 peer reviewers trained & active; electronic review system working well; Stewardship Ontario Projects Committee in place  Best practices approach in 60% of projects  $4M projects committed to “proactive” priorities  Fund is well known, well-advertised  Strategic investments in multi-family recycling, “best practices,” innovative technology business cases

14 Year Two Priority Areas  Maintain original priorities with shift in focus to “best practice identification & implementation” 1. MRF Rationalization 2. Multi-family Recycling 3. User Pay & Program Compliance 4. Waste Audits & Benchmarking 5. Communication & Education 6. Cost Containment  Maintain original priorities with shift in focus to “best practice identification & implementation” 1. MRF Rationalization 2. Multi-family Recycling 3. User Pay & Program Compliance 4. Waste Audits & Benchmarking 5. Communication & Education 6. Cost Containment e.g. best practices for collection, processing & transfer, recycling contracts, enhancing material revenues

15 Year Two Program Plans Explicit best practice focus – analysis of better performing programs/cost areas – invest in under-performing programs  Capital funding projects — case by case  Program evaluation system  Communicate results/success; key audiences  For more information & to apply – – Guy Perry, & then go to funding Explicit best practice focus – analysis of better performing programs/cost areas – invest in under-performing programs  Capital funding projects — case by case  Program evaluation system  Communicate results/success; key audiences  For more information & to apply – – Guy Perry, & then go to funding

16 “Big City” E&E Fund Projects Guy Perry Stewardship Ontario Moderator Guy Perry Stewardship Ontario Moderator

17 Big City Projects  Why are projects in major urban areas important to Stewardship Ontario & the E&E Fund? – they represent large sources of the ”new tonnes” needed to reach 60% – they represent high “total dollar” costs – there are major opportunities to reduce per tonne costs – e.g. MRF automation (paper & plastics), implementing collection efficiencies & ensuring “top dollar” for materials marketed  Why are projects in major urban areas important to Stewardship Ontario & the E&E Fund? – they represent large sources of the ”new tonnes” needed to reach 60% – they represent high “total dollar” costs – there are major opportunities to reduce per tonne costs – e.g. MRF automation (paper & plastics), implementing collection efficiencies & ensuring “top dollar” for materials marketed

18 Big Cities Session Speakers  Geoff Rathbone – City of Toronto – Acting General Manager, Solid Waste Management Services – has guided Toronto’s diversion policy & programs for several years – discussing one of Toronto’s most ambitious new projects – user pay in multi-family buildings  Jay Stanford – City of London – Division Manager of Environmental Programs & Customer Relations, Environmental & Engineering Services Department – been involved in waste diversion for 20 years – reporting on progress of year long study to examine potential for a large scale, regional MRF in Southwestern Ontario  Geoff Rathbone – City of Toronto – Acting General Manager, Solid Waste Management Services – has guided Toronto’s diversion policy & programs for several years – discussing one of Toronto’s most ambitious new projects – user pay in multi-family buildings  Jay Stanford – City of London – Division Manager of Environmental Programs & Customer Relations, Environmental & Engineering Services Department – been involved in waste diversion for 20 years – reporting on progress of year long study to examine potential for a large scale, regional MRF in Southwestern Ontario

19 Toronto’s Multi-Unit User Pay Program Geoff Rathbone City of Toronto Geoff Rathbone City of Toronto

20 Toronto’s Integrated Multi-Unit Recycling Strategy  Project goal – to provide a financial incentive (through user fees) to reduce blue box waste from multi-units to the same level as single family households  Anticipated impacts – 30,000 tonnes each year of more blue box waste diverted in a highly cost effective manner  More information:  Project goal – to provide a financial incentive (through user fees) to reduce blue box waste from multi-units to the same level as single family households  Anticipated impacts – 30,000 tonnes each year of more blue box waste diverted in a highly cost effective manner  More information:

21 Background – Driving Forces  Toronto’s last landfill closed in 2002 – All waste now goes to Michigan  Goal of 100% diversion from landfill by 2012  Council adopted multi-unit waste reduction levy (June 2005); initiate by July 2006  Purpose: provide financial incentive to reduce waste (not increase revenue)  Toronto’s last landfill closed in 2002 – All waste now goes to Michigan  Goal of 100% diversion from landfill by 2012  Council adopted multi-unit waste reduction levy (June 2005); initiate by July 2006  Purpose: provide financial incentive to reduce waste (not increase revenue)

22 Diverting 9% through blue box Levy set to divert 26% of blue box

23  Buildings given fixed amount of no-charge waste – 500 kilograms/unit/year – based on amount each should produce if recycling at single family rate of ~ 60% Blue/Grey Box materials  Levy on waste above no-charge limit  Measurement by meter – transponder on bins sends information (location, date & volume) to central database at collection  Buildings given fixed amount of no-charge waste – 500 kilograms/unit/year – based on amount each should produce if recycling at single family rate of ~ 60% Blue/Grey Box materials  Levy on waste above no-charge limit  Measurement by meter – transponder on bins sends information (location, date & volume) to central database at collection How Does it Work?

24 Technology: Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Transponder on bin & RFID reader allows information to be sent via satellite (bin size, location, date, time) Service & billing information provided to customer

25 Implementation  Buildings to develop “comprehensive recycling improvement plan” – communications; increased recycling container availability; make recycling as easy as disposal  16 new By-law enforcement officers  Landlord/property manager workshops  “Education first, enforcement second” – tenant/resident communication education program  Buildings to develop “comprehensive recycling improvement plan” – communications; increased recycling container availability; make recycling as easy as disposal  16 new By-law enforcement officers  Landlord/property manager workshops  “Education first, enforcement second” – tenant/resident communication education program

26 Financial Impact  Levy set at $30/tonne (cost of collection) with escalating charge up to $90 per tonne  Building costs: $3/unit/year average; ~$20/unit/year for poor recyclers  City cost: $1.6 million (2005); $2.8 million (2006)  Estimated revenue: $0.7 million (2006)  Levy set at $30/tonne (cost of collection) with escalating charge up to $90 per tonne  Building costs: $3/unit/year average; ~$20/unit/year for poor recyclers  City cost: $1.6 million (2005); $2.8 million (2006)  Estimated revenue: $0.7 million (2006)

27 How to Reduce Levy Costs  Improve recycling program  Set out only full bins for collection  Properly compact waste in bins  Keep bulky items out of garbage bins (bulky items collected separately)  Improve recycling program  Set out only full bins for collection  Properly compact waste in bins  Keep bulky items out of garbage bins (bulky items collected separately)

28 Next Steps  Superintendent/Property Management Workshops: Oct/Nov 2005  Recycling Improvement Plans: Nov 2005  Tenant/Resident Education: Jan/Feb 2006  Implementation: Mock Billing: January to June 2006  Live Billing: July 2006  Superintendent/Property Management Workshops: Oct/Nov 2005  Recycling Improvement Plans: Nov 2005  Tenant/Resident Education: Jan/Feb 2006  Implementation: Mock Billing: January to June 2006  Live Billing: July 2006

29 London’s Regional MRF Study Jay Stanford City of London Jay Stanford City of London

30 London Regional MRF  Project goal – examination of the potential economic & environmental benefits of a new regional MRF to process recyclables from London & surrounding municipalities  Anticipated impacts – lower recycling costs  More information:  Project goal – examination of the potential economic & environmental benefits of a new regional MRF to process recyclables from London & surrounding municipalities  Anticipated impacts – lower recycling costs  More information:

31 1.Significant budget issues 2.Optimize programs – 60% recycling & diversion 3.Track record exists in London 4.Foundation exists in Ontario 5.Integrated waste management opportunities 1.Significant budget issues 2.Optimize programs – 60% recycling & diversion 3.Track record exists in London 4.Foundation exists in Ontario 5.Integrated waste management opportunities Why Are We Looking At A Regional MRF?

32  MRF Optimization Study (2001) suggests regional savings possible  Ontario blue box MRFs (2005)  45 municipalities currently ship to 10 MRFs  55,000 tonnes of municipal recyclables  Variety of programs  MRF Optimization Study (2001) suggests regional savings possible  Ontario blue box MRFs (2005)  45 municipalities currently ship to 10 MRFs  55,000 tonnes of municipal recyclables  Variety of programs Background

33 Study Details  Analysis of various collection & transfer options  Single stream, two stream  Identification of the catchment area for the regional facility  Consider potential environmental benefits/costs  Analysis of various collection & transfer options  Single stream, two stream  Identification of the catchment area for the regional facility  Consider potential environmental benefits/costs

34 Study Details  Information sources – WDO Datacall – Municipal interviews – Empirical/calculated data – Interim WDO MRF Regionalization Report – Knowledge Network (1 versus 2 stream)  Information sources – WDO Datacall – Municipal interviews – Empirical/calculated data – Interim WDO MRF Regionalization Report – Knowledge Network (1 versus 2 stream)

35 Cost/Financial Impact  Project cost (study) = $160,000  Funding sources – E&E Fund – FCM – City of London  Savings of $10,000 by participation in Knowledge Network (single stream)  Project cost (study) = $160,000  Funding sources – E&E Fund – FCM – City of London  Savings of $10,000 by participation in Knowledge Network (single stream)

36 Preliminary Findings  Study not complete  Direct haul cheaper than transfer haul  Potential cost savings of $0.5 to $1 million ($10 to $20 per tonne)  More clout with markets  Can absorb difficult/small volume recyclables  Different programs present issues  Study not complete  Direct haul cheaper than transfer haul  Potential cost savings of $0.5 to $1 million ($10 to $20 per tonne)  More clout with markets  Can absorb difficult/small volume recyclables  Different programs present issues

37 Implementation  Complete StudyJan 2006  Municipal DecisionsMar 2006  Tender/RFPDec 2006  New MRFApr 2008  Complete StudyJan 2006  Municipal DecisionsMar 2006  Tender/RFPDec 2006  New MRFApr 2008

38 Barriers  Defining partners  Commitment from partners  Governance issues  Ownership issues  Loss of local jobs/local control  Defining partners  Commitment from partners  Governance issues  Ownership issues  Loss of local jobs/local control

39 Outside Influence Factors  WDO payments  Emerging cost bands  Other incentives  Small/medium businesses  The future... more recycling = more cost  WDO payments  Emerging cost bands  Other incentives  Small/medium businesses  The future... more recycling = more cost

40 Next Steps  Meet with potential partners  Complete study (report available by early 2006)  Make it happen  Meet with potential partners  Complete study (report available by early 2006)  Make it happen

41 Questions & Answers

42 Rural/Northern Ontario E&E Fund Projects Joe Hall Ottawa Valley Waste Recovery Centre Moderator Joe Hall Ottawa Valley Waste Recovery Centre Moderator

43 Why Focus on Rural & Northern Projects  Identify & address specific geographical/ demographic issues: – collection costs - longer roads, fewer homes – different levels of service – more depots – fewer multi family vs. single family households – less transient but higher seasonal population – shipping costs – distance-processing/markets – waste composition/amounts different  Identify & address specific geographical/ demographic issues: – collection costs - longer roads, fewer homes – different levels of service – more depots – fewer multi family vs. single family households – less transient but higher seasonal population – shipping costs – distance-processing/markets – waste composition/amounts different

44 E&E Fund Rural Northern Ontario Projects  4 specific northern/rural projects underway - $372,000 E&E Fund commitment – Dryden Transfer Facility Brad Johns – Renfrew County MRF Study Joe Hall – E&E Fund North Strategy Michael Cant – Quinte Depot Review Rick Clow  4 specific northern/rural projects underway - $372,000 E&E Fund commitment – Dryden Transfer Facility Brad Johns – Renfrew County MRF Study Joe Hall – E&E Fund North Strategy Michael Cant – Quinte Depot Review Rick Clow

45 Projects with Rural/Northern Component  Waste audits in North Glengarry, Sudbury, Osgoode Village (Ottawa)  Time & Motion Collection work in Pelham & Port Colborne (Niagara Region)  P&E Best Practices (focus group in Kirkland Lake)  AMRC User Pay Study  Waste audits in North Glengarry, Sudbury, Osgoode Village (Ottawa)  Time & Motion Collection work in Pelham & Port Colborne (Niagara Region)  P&E Best Practices (focus group in Kirkland Lake)  AMRC User Pay Study

46 Main Presenters  Rick Clow – General Manager, Centre & South Hastings Waste Services Board – reporting on study to optimize depot recovery & cost in nine leading depot programs  Michael Cant – Manager, Solid Waste Group, Totten Sims Hubicki Associates – working with northern municipalities over past 15 years on landfill, diversion & composting projects – reporting on study of diversion in Northern Ontario to establish future funding needs via E&E Fund  Rick Clow – General Manager, Centre & South Hastings Waste Services Board – reporting on study to optimize depot recovery & cost in nine leading depot programs  Michael Cant – Manager, Solid Waste Group, Totten Sims Hubicki Associates – working with northern municipalities over past 15 years on landfill, diversion & composting projects – reporting on study of diversion in Northern Ontario to establish future funding needs via E&E Fund

47 Depot Recycling Best Practices Rick Clow Quinte Waste Solutions Rick Clow Quinte Waste Solutions

48 Quinte Depot Review  Goals: – review practices at rural recycling depots & locate/report on ‘best’ – assess Quinte’s rural depot system, trial ‘best’ results from depot review report  Expect: – increased capture rates – reduced unit costs – ‘better’ practices to be made common tested, knowledge  For more information: Mary Little  Goals: – review practices at rural recycling depots & locate/report on ‘best’ – assess Quinte’s rural depot system, trial ‘best’ results from depot review report  Expect: – increased capture rates – reduced unit costs – ‘better’ practices to be made common tested, knowledge  For more information: Mary Little

49 Background  Rural depot systems traditionally have lower kilograms/household/year compared to curbside – What is the average rural depot recyclable recovery rate/comparator? – Which programs have higher capture rates? – What factors contribute to a higher capture rate?  Lower unit costs appear to follow from higher capture rates  Rural depot systems traditionally have lower kilograms/household/year compared to curbside – What is the average rural depot recyclable recovery rate/comparator? – Which programs have higher capture rates? – What factors contribute to a higher capture rate?  Lower unit costs appear to follow from higher capture rates

50 Sources & Findings  Sources: – 2003 WDO Tonnage Datacall – Rural recycling depot systems; no curbside  Findings: – Average: 75 kilograms/household/year Rural depots: 10/22 south & 4/23 north higher 5 > 200 kg/hh/yr (286 kg/hh/yr) – Leading programs: Twp. Amaranth, Casey, Augusta & Algonquin Highlands & Perry  Sources: – 2003 WDO Tonnage Datacall – Rural recycling depot systems; no curbside  Findings: – Average: 75 kilograms/household/year Rural depots: 10/22 south & 4/23 north higher 5 > 200 kg/hh/yr (286 kg/hh/yr) – Leading programs: Twp. Amaranth, Casey, Augusta & Algonquin Highlands & Perry

51 Influencing Factors from Detailed Reviews of Top 14 1.Collection/contract: Encourage segregation of costs: e.g. bin costs, collection/haulage to MRF, processing, marketing request a revenue rebate some flexibility: e.g. extra summer containers 1.Collection/contract: Encourage segregation of costs: e.g. bin costs, collection/haulage to MRF, processing, marketing request a revenue rebate some flexibility: e.g. extra summer containers

52 Influencing Factors (2) 2.Facilities & operations - must be convenient (location, hours, layout): Centrally located depot(s) Accessibly laid out Ensure accessibility via enhanced hours of operation Serve the seasonal population with extra hours & containers Use at least a two sort or 2-sort plus OCC & possibly plus glass 2.Facilities & operations - must be convenient (location, hours, layout): Centrally located depot(s) Accessibly laid out Ensure accessibility via enhanced hours of operation Serve the seasonal population with extra hours & containers Use at least a two sort or 2-sort plus OCC & possibly plus glass

53 Influencing Factors (3) 3.Diversion infrastructure: Have user pay for garbage Mandatory recycling/no dumping/burn control/bag limit by-laws 4.Promotion & education: Have & distribute cards Do regular contact Offer free blue boxes / have available at depot 3.Diversion infrastructure: Have user pay for garbage Mandatory recycling/no dumping/burn control/bag limit by-laws 4.Promotion & education: Have & distribute cards Do regular contact Offer free blue boxes / have available at depot

54 Influencing Factors (4) 5.Municipal attributes: Hauling distance from depot to MRF of more than 2 hour increases costs 6.Attendant duties: Presence reduces contamination, aids promotion, increases capture Costs: Net costs ranged from $78 to $438/tonne for top nine with average of $239/tonne Landfill capacity/life also a major driver 5.Municipal attributes: Hauling distance from depot to MRF of more than 2 hour increases costs 6.Attendant duties: Presence reduces contamination, aids promotion, increases capture Costs: Net costs ranged from $78 to $438/tonne for top nine with average of $239/tonne Landfill capacity/life also a major driver

55 Other Points  Depots that are part of a program that also has curbside service should see higher capture rates & lower net costs  Consider using weigh scales  Consider having more than one depot  Consider the type of container to be utilized  Consider leasing containers  ‘Cutting edge’ is compaction  Depots that are part of a program that also has curbside service should see higher capture rates & lower net costs  Consider using weigh scales  Consider having more than one depot  Consider the type of container to be utilized  Consider leasing containers  ‘Cutting edge’ is compaction

56 What Will Quinte Study?  Givens: – QWS: segregates costs, is aggressive re: revenue & container supply – Depot operations: managed by ‘Lower Tier’ – Geography (distance)  Options: – Type of container: roll-off, enclosed container, 95 gal cart – Type of sort up to a five sort – (Seasonality)  Givens: – QWS: segregates costs, is aggressive re: revenue & container supply – Depot operations: managed by ‘Lower Tier’ – Geography (distance)  Options: – Type of container: roll-off, enclosed container, 95 gal cart – Type of sort up to a five sort – (Seasonality)

57 This Project  Total cost of ~ $33,000. (⅓ from Quinte)  Step 1: Report by Mary Little, SGS – Thanks to municipalities for voluntary cooperation  Step 2: Assess Quinte’s rural depot system  Step 3: Test ‘container’ results from 1, report  Anticipate results by Spring 2006  INFO:  Total cost of ~ $33,000. (⅓ from Quinte)  Step 1: Report by Mary Little, SGS – Thanks to municipalities for voluntary cooperation  Step 2: Assess Quinte’s rural depot system  Step 3: Test ‘container’ results from 1, report  Anticipate results by Spring 2006  INFO:

58 E&E Fund Northern Strategy Michael Cant Totten Sims Hubicki Michael Cant Totten Sims Hubicki

59 E&E Fund Northern Strategy  Project Goal – define diversion in the North – identify future directions  Anticipated impacts – sharing of program information resulting in increased diversion/lower cost  More information: Michael Cant  ext  Project Goal – define diversion in the North – identify future directions  Anticipated impacts – sharing of program information resulting in increased diversion/lower cost  More information: Michael Cant  ext. 2286

60 Study Objectives  Assess best practices & opportunities for improvement  Best use of E&E Funds to increase marketed tonnes  Engage other stakeholders (provincial & federal) in North  Assess best practices & opportunities for improvement  Best use of E&E Funds to increase marketed tonnes  Engage other stakeholders (provincial & federal) in North

61 Perspective  58 programs report to WDO  Populations 240 to 155,000  Marketed tonnes 1 to 10,400  1,700 km Kenora to Mattawa  58 programs report to WDO  Populations 240 to 155,000  Marketed tonnes 1 to 10,400  1,700 km Kenora to Mattawa

62 Results

63 Regions & Categories Five Regions 1.Northwestern 2.Algoma/Manitoulin 3.Sudbury & Area 4.North Bay/Parry Sound 5.Northeastern Five Regions 1.Northwestern 2.Algoma/Manitoulin 3.Sudbury & Area 4.North Bay/Parry Sound 5.Northeastern Four categories 1.Large Urban Collection 2.Small Urban Collection 3.Rural Collection 4.Rural Depot

64 Northern Ontario

65 Regional Findings Northwestern Programs becoming more expensive  Departure of NORA resulted in individual programs Algoma/Manitoulin Significant improvements over 3 years  2 private MRFs, 1 services 10 communities Sudbury Area Overall program efficient when compared to other north programs  New MRF being planned

66 Regional Findings North Bay/Parry Sound Closer to markets/more competition  Performing poorly (significant depots) Northeastern Lowest cost per household in North but low capture rates  MRF approaching capacity  Need to improve capture rates

67 Key Issues  Marketing a challenge for small programs  Assistance with tendering required  Regional solutions should be encouraged  Need to look at why programs are collecting materials with no markets  Marketing a challenge for small programs  Assistance with tendering required  Regional solutions should be encouraged  Need to look at why programs are collecting materials with no markets

68 Next Steps  Prepare report & findings  Meet with other stakeholders to define funding availability  Finalize report (December 2005)  Prepare report & findings  Meet with other stakeholders to define funding availability  Finalize report (December 2005)

69 Questions & Answers

70 Break

71 E&E Fund Financing & Communications Projects Geoff Love Stewardship Ontario Moderator Geoff Love Stewardship Ontario Moderator

72 E&E Innovative Finance Projects Underway  Why “innovative finance” as an E&E priority area? – the way we fund recycling MAY have an impact on our ability to innovate/invest – three active projects; $154K E&E commitment AMRC User Pay Study – Stratford User Pay Optimization Study – -“refreshing” one of the province’s earliest user pay programs London/Ottawa Waste Utility Study - -feasibility/impact analysis of “independent” waste utility on blue box diversion … what does the Municipal Act “allow” for?  Why “innovative finance” as an E&E priority area? – the way we fund recycling MAY have an impact on our ability to innovate/invest – three active projects; $154K E&E commitment AMRC User Pay Study – Stratford User Pay Optimization Study – -“refreshing” one of the province’s earliest user pay programs London/Ottawa Waste Utility Study - -feasibility/impact analysis of “independent” waste utility on blue box diversion … what does the Municipal Act “allow” for?

73 E&E Communications Projects  A decade of neglect …  Effective BB promotion & education are critical to achieving 60% cost effectively  Second largest area of E&E commitment (25% of funds allocated) - $1.3 million  3 projects: – Hamilton Blue Box Communication Strategy – modeling a strategic approach to waste diversion (including blue box) communications  A decade of neglect …  Effective BB promotion & education are critical to achieving 60% cost effectively  Second largest area of E&E commitment (25% of funds allocated) - $1.3 million  3 projects: – Hamilton Blue Box Communication Strategy – modeling a strategic approach to waste diversion (including blue box) communications

74 Communications (con’t)  Identifying “Best Practices” in Municipal Blue Box Promotion & Education – AMRC-led – Literature review; focus group research – Draft guide with beta test group – AMRC developing P&E “help desk” idea for inclusion in Knowledge Network  Enhanced Blue Box Recovery Project – Peel, York, Durham, Toronto, MGM Management – 4 part technical research: segmentation analysis; school/public space research; residue analysis/methodology; mass balance – Next steps qualitative & quantitative research – $ 1milion available to launch targeted campaign in 2006  Identifying “Best Practices” in Municipal Blue Box Promotion & Education – AMRC-led – Literature review; focus group research – Draft guide with beta test group – AMRC developing P&E “help desk” idea for inclusion in Knowledge Network  Enhanced Blue Box Recovery Project – Peel, York, Durham, Toronto, MGM Management – 4 part technical research: segmentation analysis; school/public space research; residue analysis/methodology; mass balance – Next steps qualitative & quantitative research – $ 1milion available to launch targeted campaign in 2006

75 Main Presenters  Clayton Sampson – Waste Management Supervisor, Oxford County – active in AMRC: sits on Policy & Programs Committee – reporting on AMRC’s recently completed user pay research project  Dennis Guy – City of Hamilton, Project Manager, Community Outreach, Department of Public Works, Waste Management – Reporting on 4 year waste diversion communication strategy & program  Clayton Sampson – Waste Management Supervisor, Oxford County – active in AMRC: sits on Policy & Programs Committee – reporting on AMRC’s recently completed user pay research project  Dennis Guy – City of Hamilton, Project Manager, Community Outreach, Department of Public Works, Waste Management – Reporting on 4 year waste diversion communication strategy & program

76 User Pay Research Project Clayton Sampson AMRC Clayton Sampson AMRC

77 Analysis of User Pay Programs in Ontario  Project goal is to examine the current status of user pay systems & detail the performance user pay has on recycling & waste reduction  More information is available from or  Website link:  Project goal is to examine the current status of user pay systems & detail the performance user pay has on recycling & waste reduction  More information is available from or  Website link:

78 Background / Context / Problem Description  User pay shown to be important measure to increase capture of recyclables  Current status/information of programs in Ontario not readily available  Need to document programs & look at what works  User pay shown to be important measure to increase capture of recyclables  Current status/information of programs in Ontario not readily available  Need to document programs & look at what works

79 Tasks/Organization  Was an AMRC undertaking to provide information to municipalities  Policy & Programs Committee took on the task  Team of municipal members oversaw project & provided direction  Was an AMRC undertaking to provide information to municipalities  Policy & Programs Committee took on the task  Team of municipal members oversaw project & provided direction

80 Implementation  Four components of project 1. Data collection 2. Data verification & analysis 3. Updating AMRC User Pay Implementation Guide 4. Providing a workshop on user pay  Four components of project 1. Data collection 2. Data verification & analysis 3. Updating AMRC User Pay Implementation Guide 4. Providing a workshop on user pay

81 Cost/Financial Impact  Estimated budget: $45,000 plus in-kind labour from municipal team  Received $26,500 plus $4,700 for workshop registration subsidy  Estimated budget: $45,000 plus in-kind labour from municipal team  Received $26,500 plus $4,700 for workshop registration subsidy

82 Impacts/Results  Survey yielded some interesting findings: 1. User pay programs result in increased recovery of recyclable items 2. Many interesting & varied programs operating  Survey yielded some interesting findings: 1. User pay programs result in increased recovery of recyclable items 2. Many interesting & varied programs operating

83 Program/MunicipalityType of UP program % Increase in Recyclables Tonnage* Materials added in launch year Bluewater Recycling Association Full50%NA Bonnechere Valley, TwpFull11%NA Edwardsburgh Cardinal, Twp Full33%Tubs/lids Hanover, TownPartial (52 “free”/year)13%NA Mono, TownPartial (2 “free”/week)26%NA Orangeville, TownPartial (2 “free”/week )25%NA Orillia, CityPartial (40 “free” /year22%NA Oxford, CountyFull9%Tubs/lids, bottles Peel, RegionPartial (3 “free”/week)53%PC, film The Blue Mountains, Municipality Partial (1 “free”/week)56%Went from depot to curbside collection, added tubs/lids, bottles, PS Impacts/Results *pre launch year verus launch year

84 Lessons Learned  There are a lot of user pay programs in Ontario  There is a lot of experience out there with user pay  That the interest in the concept is growing  There are a lot of user pay programs in Ontario  There is a lot of experience out there with user pay  That the interest in the concept is growing

85 Next Steps  Implementation guide will be finished by the end of the month  Challenge is to keep this information current to be useful  Predict that user pay will become the standard in the province  Implementation guide will be finished by the end of the month  Challenge is to keep this information current to be useful  Predict that user pay will become the standard in the province

86 Enhanced Blue Box Study Dennis Guy City of Hamilton Dennis Guy City of Hamilton

87 Determining Effective Blue Box Communication  Project goal – to find the most effective media choice(s) for promoting blue box programs  Anticipated impacts – increase revenues by $2 for every $1 spent on promotion  More information:  Website link:  Project goal – to find the most effective media choice(s) for promoting blue box programs  Anticipated impacts – increase revenues by $2 for every $1 spent on promotion  More information:  Website link:

88 Background  Overall Diversion Target – Hamilton’s blue box capture rate  Review of Previous Research – telephone Surveys – waste Composition Studies  New Research  Overall Diversion Target – Hamilton’s blue box capture rate  Review of Previous Research – telephone Surveys – waste Composition Studies  New Research

89 Details: How Does it Work?  Communication strategy – capture rate-focused – context dependent – seasonal – diverse  Proposals from local media – newspaper – television  Consistent with research – newspaper – television – direct mail  Communication strategy – capture rate-focused – context dependent – seasonal – diverse  Proposals from local media – newspaper – television  Consistent with research – newspaper – television – direct mail

90 More details  Current campaign – February 2005 to present  Communication & tonnage – quantitative market research telephone survey – qualitative market research focus groups – waste composition study curbside analysis  Current campaign – February 2005 to present  Communication & tonnage – quantitative market research telephone survey – qualitative market research focus groups – waste composition study curbside analysis

91 Tasks/Organization  Telephone survey / focus groups – EHL Harrison Consulting Inc.  Waste composition study – terms of reference – consultant to be determined  Telephone survey / focus groups – EHL Harrison Consulting Inc.  Waste composition study – terms of reference – consultant to be determined

92 Implementation  Telephone survey – assess awareness & usage of blue box program – assess awareness of promotional activities – 700 residents, 94% confidence level, +/- 4%  Focus groups – 4 groups to establish ‘soft’ information – message recall & retention – memorable elements of campaign  Waste composition study – 4 to 6 study areas – 30 households per study area – blue box capture rate  Telephone survey – assess awareness & usage of blue box program – assess awareness of promotional activities – 700 residents, 94% confidence level, +/- 4%  Focus groups – 4 groups to establish ‘soft’ information – message recall & retention – memorable elements of campaign  Waste composition study – 4 to 6 study areas – 30 households per study area – blue box capture rate

93 Cost/Financial Impact  Project cost: $775,000  Funding sources – E & E: $50,000  Project cost: $775,000  Funding sources – E & E: $50,000

94 Impacts/Results  Cross-Reference with Tonnage Info – Have capture rates increased? – Which ones?  Cross-Reference Previous Studies – What worked? / What didn’t work? – Why?  Analyse according to media – What worked? / What didn’t work? – Why? – What impact does this have beyond Hamilton?  Cross-Reference with Tonnage Info – Have capture rates increased? – Which ones?  Cross-Reference Previous Studies – What worked? / What didn’t work? – Why?  Analyse according to media – What worked? / What didn’t work? – Why? – What impact does this have beyond Hamilton?

95 Lessons Learned  Guiding principles – do few things well – recognize lifestyle diversity – state the problem – advertising and public relations – We can’t do this alone – reward & recognition – evaluation – funding  More to come on lessons learned from the approach that was taken  Guiding principles – do few things well – recognize lifestyle diversity – state the problem – advertising and public relations – We can’t do this alone – reward & recognition – evaluation – funding  More to come on lessons learned from the approach that was taken

96 Next Steps  Complete by end of 2005 – market research – waste composition study  Results – January / February 2006  Report available through WDO  Complete by end of 2005 – market research – waste composition study  Results – January / February 2006  Report available through WDO

97 Questions & Answers

98 Knowledge Network Project Launch Geoff Love Stewardship Ontario Moderator Geoff Love Stewardship Ontario Moderator

99  Because its not just about the money…  This may be the most important & impactful E&E project that we support  Goal – to return Ontario to the forefront of residential recycling in Canada & internationally  Because its not just about the money…  This may be the most important & impactful E&E project that we support  Goal – to return Ontario to the forefront of residential recycling in Canada & internationally Why a Knowledge Network

100 Our Speakers for This Session  Betty Muise – 25 years in recycling; a resource to VuBiz on this project – internationally known as an educator specializing in waste diversion & recycling  Marla Marnock – VP Quality Assurance, VuBiz & Manager for Knowledge Network project – VuBiz is Canada’s largest on-line learning service provider – will demonstrate value & simplicity of network in today’s launch  Alfred Von Mirbach – Senior Consultant with REIC Perth – key person behind ecoPerth, award-winning NGO that has implemented many innovative climate change action initiatives – will walk us through model tender contract tools  Betty Muise – 25 years in recycling; a resource to VuBiz on this project – internationally known as an educator specializing in waste diversion & recycling  Marla Marnock – VP Quality Assurance, VuBiz & Manager for Knowledge Network project – VuBiz is Canada’s largest on-line learning service provider – will demonstrate value & simplicity of network in today’s launch  Alfred Von Mirbach – Senior Consultant with REIC Perth – key person behind ecoPerth, award-winning NGO that has implemented many innovative climate change action initiatives – will walk us through model tender contract tools

101 Knowledge Network Overview Betty Muise

102 Why a Knowledge Network? Knowledge Network allows Ontario municipalities to “capture” & apply innovative solutions to the design, management & operation of residential recycling programs

103 Web-based resource & information sharing & learning “hub” combining best features of web sites & best features of computer based learning Key design feature = responsive to interests & issues of Ontario municipalities involved in waste diversion Web-based resource & information sharing & learning “hub” combining best features of web sites & best features of computer based learning Key design feature = responsive to interests & issues of Ontario municipalities involved in waste diversion What is the Knowledge Network?

104 Knowledge Network Elements  On-line discussion threads – allow for organized dialogue, debate & discussion  On-line education modules - to learn specific new information or approaches  Access to job aids, tools & templates  Surveys for real-time feedback on issues  alerts for items of interest  Any or all of these elements can be used to respond to a learning need or information sharing opportunity  On-line discussion threads – allow for organized dialogue, debate & discussion  On-line education modules - to learn specific new information or approaches  Access to job aids, tools & templates  Surveys for real-time feedback on issues  alerts for items of interest  Any or all of these elements can be used to respond to a learning need or information sharing opportunity

105 Making Information Sharing Convenient & Effective The Knowledge Network is highly moderated & managed to ensure focus on needs of target audience – Who needs to hear this information? – Who can contribute the most to this question/topic? – What tools best support sharing of what we have learned about this topic? The Knowledge Network is highly moderated & managed to ensure focus on needs of target audience – Who needs to hear this information? – Who can contribute the most to this question/topic? – What tools best support sharing of what we have learned about this topic?

106 Summary  The Knowledge Network is responsive to information needs & opportunities  Allows for sharing & creation of knowledge  Capture insights & tried & true ideas & practices generated from real people/real projects  Municipalities can communicate with each other in targeted manner  Convenient, direct anywhere-anytime access to informed stakeholders  Users participate as contributors & beneficiaries  The Knowledge Network is responsive to information needs & opportunities  Allows for sharing & creation of knowledge  Capture insights & tried & true ideas & practices generated from real people/real projects  Municipalities can communicate with each other in targeted manner  Convenient, direct anywhere-anytime access to informed stakeholders  Users participate as contributors & beneficiaries

107 How the Knowledge Network Works Marla Marnock VuBiz Marla Marnock VuBiz

108 Introducing the Knowledge Network Site

109 A Video Message from the Environment Minister Laurel C. Broten

110 1 2 Talk to Stewardship Ontario

111 Building Knowledge on E&E Fund Projects

112 1 2 3 Knowledge Product - Sample

113 Knowledge Product Tools – Printable Checklist

114 Resources

115 Interactive Feature: Join in Discussion

116 Interactive Feature: Contact Help Desk

117 We’d Like Your Opinion: Knowledge Network Survey

118 View Real-Time Results

119 Go to: OR follow links on Most of you are already registered! Just enter your address & submit. Getting to the Knowledge Network

120 Model Contracts & Markets “Help Desk” Services Alfred Von Mirbach REIC Alfred Von Mirbach REIC

121 Model Recycling Tender Tools  Project goal: to help municipalities develop better recycling tenders  Anticipated impacts: more cost-effective contracts  More information: Alfred Von Mirbach, REIC Perth (613)  Project goal: to help municipalities develop better recycling tenders  Anticipated impacts: more cost-effective contracts  More information: Alfred Von Mirbach, REIC Perth (613)

122 The Problem  High costs can be due to: – clauses that cause contractors to add unnecessary premiums – timing or clauses that scare off contractors, minimizing competition  This happens because: – municipal staff do not have sufficient time or resources to dedicate to tenders – tenders often just based on previous ones, which were based on garbage contracts from the 1970’s  High costs can be due to: – clauses that cause contractors to add unnecessary premiums – timing or clauses that scare off contractors, minimizing competition  This happens because: – municipal staff do not have sufficient time or resources to dedicate to tenders – tenders often just based on previous ones, which were based on garbage contracts from the 1970’s

123 Process  Established an Advisory Team: – municipal staff – Recycling contractors – AMRC – Stewardship Ontario staff  Developed & tested as series of e-docs  Established an Advisory Team: – municipal staff – Recycling contractors – AMRC – Stewardship Ontario staff  Developed & tested as series of e-docs

124 How It Works  Work through a series of documents/ guides – User Guide – Process Guide – Key Decisions – Tender Text – Tender Text Guide  Work through a series of documents/ guides – User Guide – Process Guide – Key Decisions – Tender Text – Tender Text Guide

125 How It Works (cont’d)  Gives options/recommendations with rationale for factors that impact cost & competition: – collection and/or processing – surety type & amount – revenue – length – units of payment  Gives options/recommendations with rationale for factors that impact cost & competition: – collection and/or processing – surety type & amount – revenue – length – units of payment

126 Two Ways to Use The Tools  Clean sheet - use sample tender text provided, editing based on decisions from other docs  Cut & paste - use tools to make key decisions, then incorporate into your existing tender  Clean sheet - use sample tender text provided, editing based on decisions from other docs  Cut & paste - use tools to make key decisions, then incorporate into your existing tender

127 Knowledge Network Version  Ported the key components of the tools to a multi-module learning product on Knowledge Network  Includes six modules  Includes on-line printable checklists to track progress & decisions  Ported the key components of the tools to a multi-module learning product on Knowledge Network  Includes six modules  Includes on-line printable checklists to track progress & decisions

128 Knowledge Network Version (cont’d)  Advantages of Knowledge Network version – allows for easier navigation – access details only if/when needed – checklists form useful reference document for when you are ready to write  Advantages of Knowledge Network version – allows for easier navigation – access details only if/when needed – checklists form useful reference document for when you are ready to write

129 Lessons Learned  Recycling RFPs are very municipal- specific & don’t fit into a template  Difficult to convince staff that dedicating time to using the tools will save them time, & their municipality money  Recycling RFPs are very municipal- specific & don’t fit into a template  Difficult to convince staff that dedicating time to using the tools will save them time, & their municipality money

130 Next Steps  Continuing with testing of conventional docs  Beginning testing of Knowledge Network version  Help desk (targeted & on-call)  Ongoing improvements & expansions  Continuing with testing of conventional docs  Beginning testing of Knowledge Network version  Help desk (targeted & on-call)  Ongoing improvements & expansions

131 Upcoming Products & Services Geoff Love Stewardship Ontario Geoff Love Stewardship Ontario

132 Content  Current: – 1 vs 2 stream threaded discussion/primer – model contracts tool  Planned – help desk services – e.g. markets support – P&E guide  Current: – 1 vs 2 stream threaded discussion/primer – model contracts tool  Planned – help desk services – e.g. markets support – P&E guide

133 Future Knowledge Network Elements-?  Multi-family  User pay  Other help desks Your input is requested:  Multi-family  User pay  Other help desks Your input is requested:

134 Questions & Answers

135 Enjoy Your Lunch! Ontario Recycler Workshop resumes at 1:30 p.m. Ontario Recycler Workshop resumes at 1:30 p.m.


Download ppt "Ontario Recycler Workshop November 3, 2005. Welcome!"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google