The city would have saved $35 million in 2002 if it had foregone recycling and sent all trash to landfills or incinerators, according to a report released today. (To read the summary report click the following link -- Refuse and Recycling: Comparing the Costs)
The report, by the city's nonpartisan Independent Budget Office, found that recycling cost an average of $46 more per ton than did traditional disposal methods, primarily because recycling is more labor-intensive than general trash collection.
The budget office stopped short of recommending that the city abandon recycling, however.
"We are just trying to look at the numbers, so people know what we are dealing with. We want to let people make informed choice," Douglas Turetsky, a spokesman for the budget office, told the New York Times for Monday editions.
But Mark Izeman, a senior lawyer at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told the Times the report was "deeply flawed" because it relied on inaccurate figures and gave inadequate weight to a new, 20-year recycling contract signed by the city that is meant to cut recycling expenses.
The city suspended glass and plastic recycling in 2002 as part of an effort to close a multibillion-dollar deficit, but metal and paper recycling were not affected. Some 796,000 tons of recycling material were collected that year, the report said.
Recycling of plastic resumed in June 2003, and glass recycling is to be reinstated in April.
The main reason for the greater cost of recycling, the report said, was that sanitation workers can collect less recyclable material than trash during an eight-hour shift, resulting in higher labor costs.
Expenditures could be reduced by hiring contractors who charge lower collection rates or finding buyers willing to spend more on certain recyclables, the report said. Scrapping plans to resume glass recycling could also reduce costs, since there is scant demand for recycled glass, the report said.
"The IBO report recognizes that evaluating recycling has to be based upon an analysis of the overall cost of the program," Jordan Barowitz, a spokesman for Mayor Michael Bloomberg, told the Times. - Associated Press
The report, by the city's nonpartisan Independent Budget Office, found that recycling cost an average of $46 more per ton than did traditional disposal methods, primarily because recycling is more labor-intensive than general trash collection.
The budget office stopped short of recommending that the city abandon recycling, however.
"We are just trying to look at the numbers, so people know what we are dealing with. We want to let people make informed choice," Douglas Turetsky, a spokesman for the budget office, told the New York Times for Monday editions.
But Mark Izeman, a senior lawyer at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told the Times the report was "deeply flawed" because it relied on inaccurate figures and gave inadequate weight to a new, 20-year recycling contract signed by the city that is meant to cut recycling expenses.
The city suspended glass and plastic recycling in 2002 as part of an effort to close a multibillion-dollar deficit, but metal and paper recycling were not affected. Some 796,000 tons of recycling material were collected that year, the report said.
Recycling of plastic resumed in June 2003, and glass recycling is to be reinstated in April.
The main reason for the greater cost of recycling, the report said, was that sanitation workers can collect less recyclable material than trash during an eight-hour shift, resulting in higher labor costs.
Expenditures could be reduced by hiring contractors who charge lower collection rates or finding buyers willing to spend more on certain recyclables, the report said. Scrapping plans to resume glass recycling could also reduce costs, since there is scant demand for recycled glass, the report said.
"The IBO report recognizes that evaluating recycling has to be based upon an analysis of the overall cost of the program," Jordan Barowitz, a spokesman for Mayor Michael Bloomberg, told the Times. - Associated Press
Latest from Recycling Today
- Nucor names new president
- DOE rare earths funding is open to recyclers
- Design for Recycling Resolution introduced
- PetStar PET recycling plant expands
- Iron Bull addresses scrap handling needs with custom hoppers
- REgroup, CP Group to build advanced MRF in Nova Scotia
- Oregon county expands options for hard-to-recycling items
- Flexible plastic packaging initiative launches in Canada
