2.  Project began in Summer of 2011  Sampled waste of 17 municipalities and regional transfer stations twice each  Looked at both composition of waste along with method for recycling and waste stream  Only sampled residential “baggable” waste

3. Municipality/FacilityApproximate 2010 Service PopulationCounty Bath8,514Sagadahoc Boothbay3,120Lincoln Central Penobscot (Dexter area)6,531Penobscot Hatch Hill (Augusta region)41,326Kennebec Houlton6,123Aroostook Lincoln5,085Penobscot Lisbon Falls9,009Androscoggin Mid Maine (Corinth region)9,306Penobscot Ogunquit892York Old Town7,840Penobscot Orono10,362Penobscot Paris-Norway10,197Oxford Pittsfield4,215Somerset Pleasant River (Columbia Falls)1,072Washington Scarborough (Ecomaine)18,919Cumberland Skowhegan8,589Somerset St. George (Tenants Harbor)2,591Knox Total153,691

4.  Improving waste management should be a targeted effort  20 years since its inception, the 50% recycling goal has not yet been reached (currently ~ 39%)  Knowing composition will help lead to the most efficient plan of attack  No study of Maine waste has been conducted since 1991/1992 and it is prudent to assume it has changed

5.  Waste was broken into 9 major categories  Organic, Paper, Plastic, Other, Construction and Demolition, Metal, Glass, Household Hazardous, and Electronics  Over 60 subcategories were used

7.  Collect sample of waste (no. of bags varied by location)  Broke open each bag and settled contents  Sorted into both final subcategories and several category groupings  Weighed bins, tallied results, and emptied contents as bins became full  Resorted bins with groupings as needed or at the end of the day

18. Major CategoryCategory % Organics 43.28% Paper 25.57% Plastic 13.44% Other Waste 5.77% Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) 3.35% Metal 3.26% Glass 2.71% Household Hazardous Waste (HHZ) 1.72% Electronics 0.92%

19. Sub-Category% of Total Waste% of Organic WasteCumulative % Food 27.86%64.38% Remainder/ Composite Organic 10.97%25.35%89.73% Diapers 2.97%6.86%96.58% Leaves & Grass 1.16%2.68%99.26% Prunings & Trimmings 0.32%0.74%100.00%

20. Sub-Category% of Total Waste% of Paper WasteCumulative % Compostable 7.93%31.02% Other Recyclable 4.90%19.15%50.17% Remainder/ Composite Paper 4.08%15.95%66.12% Magazine/ Catalog 2.88%11.25%77.37% Newsprint 2.43%9.51%86.88% High Grade Office 1.64%6.41%93.29% Uncoated Corrugated Cardboard/ Kraft 1.61%6.29%99.58% Phone Books 0.11%0.42%100.00% Total 25.57%100.00%

21. Sub-Category% of Total Waste% of Plastic WasteCumulative % All Film 4.78%35.61% Remainder/Composite Plastic 1.68%12.50%48.12% Durable Plastic Items 1.41%10.48%58.59% #3 - #7 Plastics 1.38%10.25%68.85% HDPE Bottles 1.01%7.50%76.35% Grocery/Merchandise Bags 0.82%6.10%82.45% PET Containers-non bottles 0.71%5.31%87.76% All Styrofoam 0.67%4.99%92.75% PET Bottles/Jars 0.47%3.50%96.25% Plastic ME Deposit Beverage Containers 0.36%2.68%98.93% HDPE Containers-non bottles 0.14%1.07%100.00% Total 13.44%100.00%

22. Sub-Category% of Total Waste Tin/Steel Containers 1.45% Other Ferrous 0.93% Other Non-Ferrous 0.42% Remainder/ Composite Metal 0.28% Aluminum ME Deposit Containers 0.10% Appliances 0.04% Compressed Fuel Containers 0.03% Total 3.26% Sub-Category% of Total Waste Clear Glass Containers 1.96% Glass ME Deposit Beverage Containers 0.41% Green & Other Glass Containers 0.13% R/C Glass 0.11% Flat Glass 0.07% Amber Glass Containers 0.02% Total 2.71%

23. Major CategorySubcategory% of Major Category% of Subcategory Organics43.28% Food27.86% Remainder/Composite Organic10.97% Diapers2.97% Yard Waste1.48% Paper25.57% Compostable Paper7.93% Other Recyclable Paper4.90% Remainder/Composite Paper4.08% Magainze/Catalogs2.88% Newsprint2.43% High Grade Office Paper1.64% Occ/Kraft1.61% Plastic13.44% All Film4.78% All Other Plastic3.76% #3 - #7 Plastics1.38% PET (#1)1.18% HDPE (#2)1.15% Grocery/Merch Bags0.82% Plastic ME Dep. BevCont.0.36% Other Waste5.77% Textiles (non-carpet)4.26% C&D3.35% Metal3.26% Other Metal1.71% Tin/Steel Cont.1.45% Aluminum ME Dep. Beverage Cont.0.10% Glass2.71% Clear Glass Cont.1.96% Glass ME Dep. Bev Cont.0.41%

24.  Paper percentage of total waste stream decreased by 23%  Significant decreases in Cardboard and High Grade Office Paper  Substantial decrease (75%) in Newsprint Type of Paper 91/92 % of Total Waste Stream 2011 % of Total Waste Steam Corrugated cardboard 2.921.61 High grade office 3.041.64 Magazines/ catalogs 2.922.88 Newsprint 9.882.43 Telephone books 0.190.11 Total of all paper 33.0425.57

25.  Plastics bag waste cut in half  Rigid plastics has increased by 160%  Plastic percentage of total waste stream has doubled  Plastic Film waste much of increase Type of Plastic 91/92 % of Total Waste Stream 2011 % of Total Waste Stream Plastic bags 1.590.82 All HDPE 1.231.15 Rigid plastics 1.122.92 Total of all plastic 6.6913.44

26. Metal stays consistent while individual categories have varied from1992 Glass has decreased by a third with Clear Glass Containers decreasing by 30% from 1992 Type of Metal 91/92 % of Total Waste Stream 2011 % of Total Waste Stream Tin/steel containers 2.281.45 Ferrous 0.550.93 Non-ferrous 0.070.42 Aluminum 0.390.10 Total of all metal 3.293.26 Type of Glass 91/92 % of Total Waste Stream 2011 % of Total Waste Stream Clear Glass Containers 3.392.37 Green/Amber Containers 0.170.15 All other Glass 0.500.19 Total of all Glass 4.062.71

27.  Broken down by town sampled, variations are apparent  Distribution skewed to the right  Some towns have much better recovery rates

28.  Distribution is tighter for clear glass containers and near normal  Standard deviation is less than half of newsprint

30.  Classification is by:  What is widely recycled around the state  Compostable without significant effort  What is currently not diverted in a significant amount of locations around the state  Not a perfect analysis due to fungible nature between categories of many items.

31. Waste Category% of Total WasteCumulative % of Total Waste Food Waste 27.86% R/C Organic 10.97%38.83% Compostable Paper 7.93%46.76% Other Recyclable Paper 4.90%51.66% All Film 4.78%56.44% Textiles (non-carpet) 4.26%60.70% R/C Paper 4.08%64.78% Diapers 2.97%67.75% Magainze/Catalogs 2.88%70.62% Newsprint 2.43%73.05%

32.  Where can the next advances in recycling come?  What can be improved?  Methods, actions, enforcement, technology.  What can be added and/or promoted everywhere?  Textiles, film, grocery bags, hard plastics not #1-7, composites, etc.

33.  How can we better utilize compositing to decrease the waste stream  Regional composting?  Is it feasible? Cost-effective? What process should be used? Can we control the smell?  Backyard composting  Public perception, animal issues, individual responsibility.

34.  What are best practices in Waste Management?  Pay-as-you-throw, Single-Stream, curbside collection, drop-off, mandatory recycling, HHW collection, citizen education, etc.

35.  State is still not near 50% recycling goal  Waste composition has transformed with time  Plastic waste on rise as paper and glass decline  Recyclables in waste stream is over 20% and compostable material is nearly 40%  Top 10 waste subcategories account for 73.05% of the waste  There are widespread variations by town and by subcategory that are observed