LEOMINSTER — It used to be that recycling disposal carried little to no cost compared to that of trash.
But now, thanks to international forces, some municipalities are finding recycling to be much more costly.
That’s the case for Leominster, which is now paying more per ton to dispose of residential recycling than trash.
“Now it costs way more to recycle than it does to put it in the landfill, which is really unfortunate,” said Director of Public Health Chris Knuth.
Under Leominster’s last 5-year solid waste and recycling removal contract with G.W. Shaw and Son of Greenville, New Hampshire, the city didn’t have a tipping fee for recycling, Knuth said. In the first year of the new contract that just started, the per-ton fee for recycling is $87.50 — compared to $79 per ton for trash.
If residents recycle the same 2,500 tons of materials they did last year, it will mean an additional nearly $220,000 in costs for the city, Knuth said.
Like many other cities and towns around the country, Leominster is feeling the effects of China’s “National Sword” policy that went into effect earlier this year.
China cited contamination of recyclable commodities in instituting the policy, which outright bans imports of 24 materials, including mixed papers and plastics, and imposes a .5 percent acceptable contamination rate for other materials.
That’s leaving many material recovery facilities, or MRFs, unable to sell commodities they once profited from, and the costs are now trickling down to local communities.
Contamination occurs when non-recyclable items — as well as items that are recyclable but not through most municipal collection programs — are mixed in with recyclable materials.
Knuth said he doesn’t believe contamination is a huge problem in Leominster, where G.W. Shaw and Son uses a mix of manual collection in urban areas and automated in more rural parts.
On the manual routes, he said the contractor won’t accept carts that have plastic bags, greasy pizza boxes and other visibly objectionable items. His office is notified when that happens, and it’s a pretty rare occasion, he said.
But Knuth is all too aware of how much contamination occurs in general, as evidenced by a personal anecdote.
He said he recently held a party at his house that was attended by guests from various parts of Massachusetts and other states. When he went to take his recycling bin out a few days later, Knuth said he found a variety of items that shouldn’t have been in there: a casserole tin with food still stuck to it, used paper towels and plates, and polystyrene foam cups, better known by the brand name Styrofoam.
“It dawned on me: this is the reason China doesn’t take our stuff anymore,” Knuth said. “People are careless, or lazy. It hit a home for me why things are the way they are.”
It’s a big problem next door in Fitchburg, which is also seeing an increase in recycling costs.
There, Health Director Stephen Curry recently estimated that 20 to 30 percent of Fitchburg curbside recycling is actually trash.
Now, for the first time in 25 years, the city is paying a fee for recycling disposal, at $40 per ton. That amounted to $175,000 in fiscal 2018. Curry said the fee has always been included in the contract with Waste Management since 1992, but wasn’t enforced until this year.
Using grant funds
Fitchburg is using grant funds to conduct recycling cart checks and educate residents on proper recycling etiquette.
To combat the problem at the statewide level, Lowell Recycling Coordinator Gunther Wellenstein, who is on the board of directors for MassRecycle, a statewide coalition dedicated to increasing recycling and waste reduction across Massachusetts, said the state has worked with all of its eight MRFs to compile a comprehensive list of acceptable recyclable materials that is starting to be rolled out to communities.
Many materials that have long been considered recyclable — such as milk and juice gable-top and aseptic cartons, shredded paper, cardboard canisters, clear plastic clamshell food containers and black plastic take-out trays — will no longer be accepted.
Wellenstein said it comes down to eliminating items that are among the most problematic for MRFs when marketing materials overseas.
It includes items that are more likely to have food residue, are too small to be captured by sorting machines or have complex layers of materials that are difficult to recycle.
Further complicating matters was the closure of the Ardagh glass bottle manufacturing plant in Milford a few months ago.
It was the largest buyer for Massachusetts’ plentiful supply of glass cullet, or finely ground recycled glass. Now, MRFs are stuck with tons of the material, and some are moving it for landfill disposal under state-issued temporary waste-ban waivers.
Smaller towns are also feeling the squeeze in their solid waste and recycling budgets — especially those that recently negotiated new contracts with haulers.
Shirley, which used to have free recycling disposal with E.L. Harvey, is now paying $74 per ton, Board of Health Chairman Jay Howlett told Town Meeting in May. Normally the town does three-year contracts, but opted for a one-year contract this time in the hopes that the recycling market will improve, he said.
Follow Alana Melanson at facebook.com/alana.lowellsun or on Twitter @alanamelanson.
