Massachusetts’ path to reduced waste hitting barriers

Veteran environmental sector attorney says landfill bans alone are not enough to change ingrained behaviors.

waste recycling bins
A higher recycling rate in Massachusetts may require “systematic changes in how we produce, distribute, sell and use products and services as a society” says a master plan issued by that state.
Photo provided by Adobe Stock

Thomas Mackie, an attorney with Boston-based law firm Burns & Levinson who focuses in part on environmental issues, says Massachusetts has appropriately addressed many former problems within its solid waste sector in the 40-plus years he has bene observing the industry and its regulators.

However, residents of the state continue throwing away about 6 million tons of waste each year, he says, making the notion of reaching ambitious waste reduction goals by 2030 and 2050 potentially fanciful.

In an early-February blog post, Mackie writes that at the same time the Massachusetts government was appropriately cracking down on poorly run landfills while also limiting new incinerators, “The shipment of wastes out of state has grown exponentially while in-state disposal capacity dwindles.

“With fewer places to dispose of waste in-state, the commonwealth increasingly relies upon disposal of its wastes out of state in places like New Hampshire, New York, Ohio and further afield, as far as South Carolina and Alabama," he adds.

In its quest to prevent this exported waste stream, Mackie says Massachusetts officials have largely relied on landfill bans for materials such as curbside recyclables, tires, mattresses and textiles. The state also has bans on some construction and demolition (C&D) materials.

“However, environmental not-for-profit advocacy groups are quick to point out that waste ban materials continue to comprise a significant percentage of disposed materials,” Mackie says.

In the conclusion to his blog post, Mackie notes the Massachusetts legislature has the foremost power to enact extended producer responsibility (EPR) systems and other additional methods of diverting discarded materials.

EPR systems, beyond beverage deposit-return systems in Massachusetts and about 10 other states, are starting to be introduced for additional forms of packaging in states including Maine, Colorado and Oregon.

Given numerous other environmental-related issues in play, Mackie says it remains to be seen if the Massachusetts legislature will tackle the creation of EPR programs or “systematic changes" in how we produce, distribute, sell and use products and services as a society, as described in a 2030 master plan.