Divert The Waste, Reduce The Heap

As the times have advanced, societies have advancedвЂ"be it through technological breakthroughs or social progressвЂ"but for every gain, there’s always a cost. One of the costs associated with these advancements is that of waste production. In 2005, Toronto residents, alone, produced over 865,000 tonnes of solid waste (City of Toronto, 2006). Of that, approximately 40% was diverted, due to the city’s diversion programs, such as the Blue Box and Green Bin programs (City of Toronto, 2006). Ensuring the success of such diversion programs is crucial in dealing with Toronto’s waste problem, and the citizens lie at the heart of this solution.

The tendency is usually to hold those in power responsible for the collective actions of those they govern. This, however, is the wrong notion, since it is the accumulation of the inactions of all individuals that leads to such issues becoming a problem. In Toronto, waste management is definitely a problem, since sending trash to the Michigan landfill cost about $41.3 million in 2005 (Belanger, 2006). This was the price to pay, despite the city’s waste diversion initiatives. It has been calculated that multi-unit dwellings (apartments) recycled only 13% of their garbage in 2005 (City of Toronto, 2006). With such a low response to such a basic waste diversion method, it’s not a surprise that Torontonians have to pay to have their trash dealt with. To help with this issue, the city is piloting different waste-diversion methods in multi-unit buildings, to try to improve recycling percentage in these units (City of Toronto, 2006). Despite whatever efforts the city makes, it still comes down to the residents of these units to participate in these programs, and get these statistics to a more satisfactory number. It is understandable that separating recyclables from actual trash may be harder in apartment buildings, since the recycling receptacles are usually located outside the building, whereas garbage chutes are located at easily-accessible locations on every floor, and it may be tempting for many to simply dispose the recyclables with the trash. This, however, should not be the attitude, since, in the end, it is the residents themselves who pay for the disposal of this excess, divertible waste.

Another reason for the low recycling levels can be deduced from the study by Ferrara and Missios (2005). They collected data from municipalities across Ontario that employed different waste policiesвЂ"such as charging user fees (charging money for garbage collection), setting bag limits, and mandatory recycling programsвЂ"and studied their impact on recycling intensity. They found that the highest recycling intensity was seen in communities where a user fee system was used, or where recycling was mandatory as opposed to voluntary. In communities with the user fee, however, they found that the provision of free units (an allowable limit of uncharged garbage) actually tends to negate the positive effects of the user fee. Communities that employed the bag limits did not have the desired impact of increasing recycling intensity, but rather, reduced the recycling intensity of some materials. Toronto has a six bag limit on residential garbage, which, as Ferrara and Missios (2005) suggest, may be doing more harm than good, despite the city’s mandatory recycling policy. This seems to be the trend, as “…those municipalities with higher garbage production and lower recycling levels may be selecting bag limits as a policy, and not vice versa” (Ferrara and Missios, 2005). This is precisely the case in Toronto.

Based on the response to Toronto’s Blue Box program, it is clear that the resources for waste diversion by means of recycling are being well-provided by the city, and it is merely the residents who are not acting. Taking from what Ferrara and Missios (2005) suggest, introducing user fees, as opposed to the current six bag garbage limit, the city may be able to achieve the desired increase in recycling intensity. In terms of the recycling intensity in multi-unit buildings, the city already requires that notices be placed clearly around the complex outlining the recycling requirements (City of Toronto, 2004).

Composting