Save the world. Stop recycling everything.

I rarely work on solid waste, but I've gotten some questions about this, and I know enough about it to have some opinions and ideas. So this post is more to lay those out, and less a formal report. No academic citations here!

The Washington Post has been writing about the state of recycling, both in terms of national trends and specifically in DC (perhaps prompted by the departure of Department of Public Works Director Bill Howland?). The articles highlight how the trend toward single-stream recycling has actually lowered the value of the recycled material.

Single-stream recycling is where you dump all your recyclables into one bin, smashing it down so it all fits, and haul it out to the curb where a truck comes and adds it to everybody else's crushed stuff, then schleps it to a factory where machines try to separate it back out. In the process, the glass breaks and shards get stuck in the cardboard, yogurt you didn't totally rinse out of that tub smears onto newspaper, etc. The machines hopefully also catch that clamshell that sure looks like highly recyclable #1 polyethylene terephthalate (PET) resin but is actually non-recyclable #6 polystyrene--because if inspectors find that #6 clamshell in the bale of #1, they'll reject the whole bale.

Ideally we'd all separate our recyclables into different bins, depending on material. I remember as a kid going to the Walmart parking lot and putting recyclables into different igloo-shaped containers, including separate bins for brown, green, and clear glass. I did the same in the Outer Banks, North Carolina, as recently as five years ago. Keeping everything separated meant it was super easy to gather up, melt down, and turn it into new bottles.

For better or worse, local governments decided to make recycling collection curbside, and residents didn't want to have a plethora of bins at home. Over the past 20 years, more municipalities have moved toward single-stream recycling at the behest of their residents. Recycling is an extremely popular public works service, so tax dollars are spent on expanding collection services, even to the point of mandated universal curbside recycling collection. Because everybody gets a recycling bin and weekly pickup, everyone gets to feel good about being an environmentalist! Sounds great, doesn't it?

But there's a pretty big catch that a growing number of municipalities are now recognizing.

As the contents of those big bins gets more contaminated, its monetary value drops significantly. Localities used to make a lot of money by selling their recycled materials on the commodities market; the profits more than offset the costs of collection. But localities aren't making as much money anymore, to the point where cities around the country are spending more on collection than they are getting back in materials sales. Normally, a municipality would just reduce spending when a venture becomes a financial liability. But, politically, they can’t do that with recycling services that remain highly popular with the public. (Ocean City, Maryland, got rid of municipal recycling all together a few years back, sending every piece of residential solid waste to an incinerator. Residents are feeling guilty as they adjust, and groups that hold conferences at the convention center have started hiring private haulers just so they can provide recycling to attendees, lest they look bad.)

Before I started doing this trash advocacy thing full-time, I owned a design and marketing company. One of our clients was a suburban county in Ohio that desperately wanted to raise its recycling rate, from 11 to 15 percent. (One step at a time...) Through phone surveys and focus groups, we learned that the "sometimes-recyclers" felt good when they recycled, even though it was kind of a pain. (Those bins are heavy! And sometimes gross wet stuff leaks out of them!) They felt like they were doing something really good for the planet and for future generations. What elected official wants to take that away?

But these "sometimes-recyclers" also said that they recycle so they don't feel guilty about not doing anything else that's considered environmentally friendly: "It's not like I'm going to buy a Prius, so I recycle." This phenomenon has been found in other "virtuous acts"--people who use reusable bags while grocery shopping may also tend to buy more junk food. Think about similar ways you justify your own bad behavior. (My favorite is Liz Lemon having a cupcake because she planned to go to the gym later.)

The Ohio ad campaign ended up featuring real people saying they recycle because it's "one thing" they can do for a better planet/future/community. The campaign probably did raise the participation rate, but who knows if the quality of the materials is any good or if people traded out another virtuous act to do so.

Summary: Recycling is a popular behavior, so cities push participation. But the tactics that drive participation lead to contamination. There are two major culprits to this contamination: people not knowing what is actually recyclable and glass.

All plastics are not created equal.

Scenario: you have an empty plastic container in the kitchen, flip it over, squint and see the tiny number inside the chasing arrows. (The chasing arrows make you think it's recyclable but that was just a trick by the Society of the Plastics Industry. Fortunately they just changed the symbol to a simple triangle.) Maybe it's a #5 tub. Does your city collect that? Maybe you kept the mailer you got four years ago or you have time to look it up online. (Probably not.)

In DC, you could look at the top of the new recycling cart you got in 2014. (Political maneuvering? Who knows.) Except the lid says you can recycle all plastics, #1-7. That's actually not true. #3 (vinyl), #6 (polystyrene), and #7 (other) definitely shouldn't go in the cart. For the other resins, it usually depends on the shape. Most public works officials will tell you to just put it in even if you aren't sure. The problem with that advice is that you risk ending up with those contaminated--and devalued--bales. Maryland Environmental Services reports that their facilities have a residue rate of less than 10 percent (less than 10 percent of the stuff they get can't be recycled), but that data probably requires more digging.

We learned in Ohio that giving people too much detailed information just confuses them and likely leads them to throw the stuff in the trash. But not enough info may mean an entire bale gets trashed. It's a tough problem.

The glass is half empty.

Glass is heavy, so it costs a lot to collect and transport. But it breaks and gets mixed up, and it has fairly low value on the commodities market. On the other hand, it is infinitely recyclable, and recycled glass is still cheaper to make than new glass. Domestic glass manufacturers would much prefer to have a clean stream of glass they can recycle for new bottles, and the best way to do that is to keep it separate from everything else (and separated by color). This works great in states with bottle bills (beverage container deposits). Glass manufacturers would like to add factories in more states, but they need a good glass supply in the region. A bottle bill could do this, if we're not inclined to go back to separated curbside collection. But then you're going up against beverage companies and distributors that hate any idea that could put obstacles between customers and their 24-pack of Coke Zero.

A Maryland Senate committee held a summer briefing on a proposed bottle bill last week, and I was struck by how many of the opponents defensively insisted, "I recycle a lot! My bin is always overflowing!" I wondered how much of that was empty water bottles.

So what's the answer? There probably is a perfect system that would collect every single piece of packaging that could be reused or recycled into something else. But when we're dealing with the realities of humans, and local budgets, and the scale required to make the whole transportation and logistics system that is recycling work, it's going to take some creative thinking, smart community education, and a lot of cooperation.

Ultimately, we don't want any materials to go to waste; we want people to return as much as possible; we want those materials to net as much revenue as possible; and maybe we can also prevent it from getting loose into the environment as litter. Some of the basics from the existing toolbox could get us close:
- container deposit (get the glass out!)
- bring back a separate cart for paper
- clarify what should go into recycling bins, convey it clearly, and conduct extensive public outreach to make sure people understand
- urge people to buy less packaging overall and urge manufacturers to make packaging that is recyclable (no pouches!)

We banned the bead!

Quick update, ahead of a longer statement later this week:

The General Assembly gave final passage to HB216, ban on microbeads in personal care products, last night!

The ban applies to all microbeads made of traditional plastic as well as any so-called biodegradable plastics that cannot biodegrade in wastewater treatment and marine environments. Products on store shelves will start changing in 2018, with all plastic microbeads off the shelves by the end of 2019.

The standards for this biodegradation are still being developed, so MDE will be required to review standards every few years to make sure we have the newest, most stringent regulations. The idea here is that it will be a big pain for manufacturers to reformulate every time the standards change, so they will be strongly motivated to switch to natural alternative ingredients.

At this time, this law is the strongest ban in the country! California had their first hearing yesterday, and they hope to use our bill, and the progress we made in conversations with the industry, to push for even more. Oregon and Minnesota are also still in play.

We have three action items now:
- Celebrate! This is a really big deal!
- Say thank you, particularly to Chairman Kumar Barve and Chairwoman Joan Carter Conway, Delegate Dan Morhaim, and Senator Pinsky. I would also give shoutouts to Delegates Barbara Frush, David Fraser Hidalgo, Clarence Lam, Steve Lafferty, and Jim Gilchrist, and Senator Karen Montgomery.
- Keep educating your networks about microbeads, and alternative products. It's still going to be several years before these things are off store shelves, so now it's on us to get people to stop using them.

Congratulations, team!

Residents to Maryland General Assembly: Get plastic bags out of our communities

FEBRUARY 12, 2015 — A bill introduced this week in the Maryland General Assembly would ban disposable plastic bags across the state, reducing litter and slashing overhead costs for retailers.

At a briefing today sponsored by nonprofit organization Trash Free Maryland, bill sponsor Delegate Brooke Lierman (D-District 46) described the bill as a win for communities, a win for our waterways, a win for retailers, and a win for local governments.

“If passed, this bill will result in cleaner neighborhoods and waterways throughout our state, as well as long-term decreased overhead expenses for our retailers,” added Lierman. “In other words, it is one of those rare win-win opportunities, and I am hopeful that the legislature and Governor will take action to pass this legislation this year.”

The bill, titled the Community Cleanup and Greening Act (HB551 and SB620), would prohibit retailers from giving out plastic bags at checkout, with exceptions for meats, produce, and limited other items. Retailers would also be required to charge 10 cents for each paper bag distributed at checkout, incentivizing shoppers to use reusable bags. Retailers would keep 5 to 7 cents of the charge, with the remainder returning to counties for local programs to reduce trash pollution, distribute free reusable bags, and improve access to fresh foods.

Baltimore residents at the briefing spoke of bags and other litter blighting their neighborhoods around Patterson Park and East Baltimore, diminishing a sense of community pride.

Kim Wiggins is the green coordinator for the Patterson Park neighborhood. She observed that other greening projects are made more difficult by litter in the community.

Cheryl Bryant counted 532 plastic bags on her walk from her home to William Paca Elementary School, where she volunteers. She took some of the students on a field trip to the Prince George’s County recycling center where they learned that, like Baltimore City, Prince George’s does not accept plastic bags at curbside. “Why do we expect people to take their groceries home in these bags?” she wondered.

Rashawn Smith from East Baltimore said of his time working at a grocery store, “I saw bags were a major cost. People use way too many of them, and they are unnecessary. Why do you need a bag for a bag of chips, when it comes in a bag? What are you going to do with it? You’re going to throw it away.”

Steve Raabe of OpinionWorks, an independent research firm based in Annapolis, spoke about the findings of a 2013 DC Department of the Environment survey of 177 businesses. The survey found that half of business owners reported saving money on bags, and only 8% of business owners oppose the bill.

“Litter is increasingly visible along many of our roads. The vast majority of the litter is plastic bags or plastic wrappings,” said Senator Karen Montgomery (D-District 14), the bill’s lead sponsor in the Senate. “This bill will also relieve the merchants of the cost of the paper bags they can offer since the charge covers that expense. Let’s clean up all our neighborhoods and our waterways. “

Our 2015 Maryland legislative agenda

On Wednesday, a new General Assembly will be sworn in, ushering in a new legislative session that may run very differently from the past four years. Even though the Assembly still has a veto-proof Democratic majority, Republican Governor-elect Hogan, a clear anti-tax mandate from voters, and a looming budget deficit have many progressive campaigns in a defensive posture.

Trash, however, has proven to affect everyone, from urban neighborhoods to rural farmland to the fishing community in the Chesapeake Bay. There are also a lot of ways to tackle the trash problem, and our goal is to work with the new Assembly to find common ground on solutions to keep making progress on reducing trash pollution across Maryland.

That said, we are focusing our efforts on three campaigns in 2015:

- Plastic bags. Bag bans and fees are proliferating rapidly around the US, with California passing the first state-level ban on plastic bags in 2014. In Los Angeles County, a two-year-old ban on plastic bags (with a 10-cent charge on paper) has reduced total disposable bag use by 90 percent. That's all the plastic bags, plus a drop in paper bags. It's an incredibly compelling solution to get shoppers to use reusable bags.

As we know in nearby DC, a 60-percent drop in bag use following a disposable bag fee turned into a 60-percent drop in bags found in streams and parks. Imagine cutting bag pollution in our state by 90 percent!

Bags are also a tremendous expense for retailers, sometimes as much as their third-highest overhead cost. If they no longer have to buy plastic bags, and can cut paper bag use, that savings can go back into the business, spurring investment, growth, and better pay and benefits for workers.

In 2015, Trash Free Maryland proposes that Maryland ban plastic bags and put a small fee on paper bags, motivating consumers to use reusable bags. The program pays for itself, reduces litter (and the inherent cleanup costs), and saves retailers money.

- Microbeads. A tube of toothpaste can contain as many as 300,000 plastic beads, all for color. (See those blue specks on your toothbrush?) A bottle of face wash, too. (Those are for exfoliating dead skin.) But they all wash down the drain, slip through wastewater treatment plants, and wind up in our rivers and the Bay.

Made of polyethylene, the beads absorb toxic chemicals like pesticides and fertilizers, becoming toxic balls that aquatic life mistake for food. Dentists even report finding tiny blue beads in their patients' gums. The beads are quite visible in samples from our recent Chesapeake Bay Trash Trawl.

Natural alternatives are readily available, including walnut shells, apricot stones, and even salt or sugar. Instead of washing synthetic beads into our waterways, we need to push manufacturers to redesign their products. Several major manufacturers have agreed to voluntary phaseouts, but their timelines are a decade away. Can we afford to let our fish continue to mistake these beads for food, polluting our food chain from the bottom up?

Virginia, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Hawaii, and California will all be considering legislation to ban the sale of microbead-laden products this year. Like the ban on phosphorus in detergents, these state-level bans will drive manufacturers to reformulate their products nationwide and prevent this plastic pollution from increasing on a global scale.

Trash Free Maryland asks the General Assembly to ban the sale of personal care products containing microbeads, to protect our local fisheries and the Bay.

- Enforcement. While source reduction is key, we also need to get serious about penalizing the people who contribute to the trash pollution problem. Last year we passed a bill to put points on the drivers licenses of people convicted of illegal dumping, creating a statewide penalty system and a more meaningful punishment.

We know that people litter as a rebellious act, in part because they believe they won't get caught--or if they do, the punishment will be light. Bolstering enforcement has tremendous potential to not just stop repeat offenders, but prevent other littering and dumping behavior too.

We are eager to work with legislators to identify targeted solutions, whether it's mandating community service picking up trash, streamlining the citation process to make convictions easier (and more likely to stick), or specific approaches for problem items like tires or construction debris.

We'll also be tracking related legislation as it's introduced, and working with sponsors and other advocates to pass good policies to achieve a trash free Maryland. Stay tuned for updates, and have a great session!

State and federal agencies mandate trash cleanup in Baltimore

This week the US Environmental Protection Agency gave final approval to the state's mandate that Baltimore City and Baltimore County clean up trash that makes its way to the Baltimore Harbor. The Harbor (officially the Middle and Northwest Branches of the Patapsco River, including Jones Falls and Gwynns Falls) was declared impaired by trash under the Clean Water Act in 2008, and local jurisdictions are now on the hook to remove nearly 50,000 pounds of trash from the watershed annually. They'll have five years to ramp up to that level before the plan will be reviewed, and potentially face financial penalties if they can't comply.

Both the City and County have long recognized the problem of trash pollution, and the environmental and public costs of it. In anticipation of this mandate, both jurisdictions have recently stepped up street sweeping dramatically. They are also exploring ways to change public behavior to prevent litter in the first place, from encouraging sustainable practices in homes and businesses, to increased enforcement, to legislation to control commonly littered items.

As Halle VanDerGaag, Blue Water Baltimore executive director (and Trash Free Maryland board member) told CBS Baltimore, "We've all been talking about cleaning up trash, but this really takes it from a voluntary effort to a mandatory one."

Trash Free Maryland submitted comments when the regulations were drafted. Known as a Total Maximum Daily Load, these regulations stipulate cleanup requirements for numerous water pollutants. In this area, the most famous TMDL is an umbrella set of regulations for the Chesapeake Bay, to reduce the amount of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment. Normally TMDLs set a limit for the maximum amount of the pollutant allowable in the water (hence the name Total Maximum Daily Load). Trash is relatively new in the regulatory world, with the Harbor TMDL just the third in the country (the Los Angeles River and Anacostia River being the other two).

Unlike the Bay TMDL, the Harbor and Anacostia TMDLs both scrap the idea of a maximum load and instead require removal of a specified amount of trash, based on estimates of the amount of trash polluting the water. While we're happy to have something to mandate cleanup, the removal approach is troubling for a few reasons:

- It assumes the baseline estimates are accurate.
- It doesn't factor in population growth, or a population that generates more trash over time.
- It incentivizes cleanup and engineered physical structures, which cost more than prevention.
- It disincentives prevention--calculating the weight of trash pollution prevented by, for example, an outreach campaign is at best an estimate.
- Measuring success is much easier for downstream jurisdictions (where capture is easier) than upstream ones (where trash is more dispersed).

The Harbor TMDL document does include an appendix to guide jurisdictions in developing their plans to meet the requirements, including suggestions for how to incorporate source reduction and other prevention activities. This appendix is important, and we're glad the Maryland Department of Environment heard our and our partners' comments.

After all, as the authors say on page 44, "the best way to reduce trash going into the Harbor is to persuade residents not to throw it onto streets and sidewalks in the first place."

Mid-February Legislative Update

We are one month into the three-month session of the Maryland General Assembly. Here's a quick report on bills we are following:

SB707/HB718 Community Cleanup and Greening Act: This is the bag bill. This year we are proposing that all counties in the state receive authority to enact their own fees on disposable bags. Right now only Baltimore City, Baltimore County, and Montgomery County have such authority. The bills are sponsored by Senator Jamie Raskin and Delegate Al Carr, both of Montgomery County.
Hearings: Friday, February 21, Environmental Matters Committee (House) and Tuesday, February 25, Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee (Senate)

HB1049 Prince George's County Authority to Impose Fees for Use of Disposable Bags: This is a local version of HB718, applying only to Prince George's County. The sponsors are Senator Paul Pinsky and Delegate Barbara Frush. We are waiting for a discussion and hearing to be scheduled in the County Affairs subcommittee of the Prince George's County House Delegation.

SB394 Statewide Container Recycling Refund Program: This is the container deposit, or bottle bill. It would create a system where the purchase of each bottle and can would include a five-cent deposit, refundable when the consumer returns the container for recycling at an authorized location. The bill is sponsored by Senator Brian Frosh of Montgomery County.
Hearing: Thursday, February 20, Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee (Senate)

HB405 Sales of Nonbiodegradable Cigarettes – Prohibited: This bill, sponsored by Baltimore County Delegate Jon Cardin, proposed to require all cigarettes sold in Maryland have biodegradable filters. While the intent of the bill is to reduce trash pollution, we had concerns for unintended consequences, and submitted informational testimony, described on our blog yesterday. The bill was heard in the Economic Matters Committee of the House last week but was already voted down.

SB56/HB240 Solid Waste Management Practices – Maryland Recycling and Landfill Diversion Task Force: This bill proposes a task force to study raising the recycling minimum standards and reducing maximum landfill rates for municipal solid waste in the counties. Trash Free Maryland is named as a participant in the task force, but because of a lack on consensus among Alliance members, we took no position on the bill. The sponsors are Senator Mac Middleton of Charles County and Delegate Steve Lafferty of Baltimore County. Hearings were held in Economic Matters and Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs on February 6 and February 11, respectively.

SB390/HB386 Illegal Dumping and Litter Control Law – Driver's License – Points: This local bill would allow Baltimore City to add the addition of 8 points to the driver's license of people convicted of illegal dumping while using a motor vehicle. Eight points is the same penalty applied in drunk driving and hit-and-run convictions, and generally results in an immediate license suspension. We supported the bill in hearings last week (in Judiciary and Judicial Proceedings), because stronger enforcement of litter laws will likely prevent the dumping in the first place. The bills were introduced by the Baltimore City delegation at the request of the mayor.
Updated 2/26: This bill would apply statewide, not just in Baltimore City. An amended version (lowering the points from 8 to 2–5) has passed the House and is now being considered in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee.

SB566 Littering – Mandatory Public Service: This bill, introduced by Senator Bryan Simonaire of Anne Arundel County, would add litter cleanup requirements to all littering convictions. The service requirement would be 8 to 24 hours, based on the quantity of trash littered.
Hearing: February 19, Judicial Proceedings Committee (Senate)

Statewide Bag Bill Sails Through Senate Committee Hearing

On Tuesday afternoon, the Senate’s Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs committee held its hearing on the statewide bag fee. This was the first public hearing on the bag bill in 2013, and if it is any indication, the bill might just have a fighting chance in the legislature this year. As Senator Jamie Raskin (D-Montgomery), the bill’s sponsor, explained: the fee is neither experimental nor controversial, and presents an easy opportunity for Maryland to be a national leader on this issue. We couldn’t agree more.

After a very long day of hearing other bills, the supporters for the bag fee kept our testimony brief and to the point. Julie Lawson, of the Trash Free Maryland Alliance, introduced the bill and outlined why the 5-cent fee is the best solution to dealing with the known problem of plastic bag litter. Kate Judson, representing the District Department of the Environment, spoke about the success of DC’s bag fee and offered the District’s official support. Jen Brock-Cancellieri came from the Maryland League of Conservation Voters to highlight the correlation of litter with crime, and how the bag fee will help counties comply with looming federal water cleanup mandates. Additionally, the Maryland Department of the Environment and the Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce submitted written testimony in favor of the bill.

Many opponents of bag fees argue that recycling is the solution to the bag problem. This was clearly refuted by testimony from the Prince George’s County Department of Environmental Resources (DER). Desmond Gladden, who directs the County’s recycling facility, said that it costs $110,000 annually to clean bags out of the facility’s machinery, requiring 4 hours of daily staff time and lost productivity. The low price he gets for the bags does not offset the costs of dealing with the problems they cause. Adam Ortiz, the Department’s Acting Director, noted that the County also spends millions annually on litter cleanup, and that utilities such as WSSC and DC Water also spend resources cleaning plastic bags from their systems. In other words, plastic bags aren’t free -- we are all paying to clean them up!

There were some questions and confusion on what happens to the revenue generated from the fee. Lawson clarified that the first purpose of the revenue is to buy reusable bags -- as many as needed -- to be distributed to low-income and elderly residents through existing outlets with the Department of Health and Human Resources. Leftover funds will be distributed back to the counties for environmental cleanup projects through the Chesapeake Bay Trust. Neither CBT nor the Comptroller take a cut of the revenue -- 100% will be spent on reusable bags and environmental projects.

The last part of the hearing was testimony from the bill’s opposition, including representatives from the paper bag industry, the plastic bag industry, and a citizens group. Most of their arguments were built around misunderstandings of the bill or inaccurate facts about plastic bags, and based upon the response, it seems that most of the committee saw through them. Senator Paul Pinksy (D-Prince George's), one of the bill’s cosponsors and a committee member, singlehandedly refuted many of the statements made by the opposition.

Tuesday’s hearing was a promising 2013 debut for the bag fee for Maryland. The next hurdle will be the committee hearing on the House side, on Friday, March 8. After that, each committee will vote on the bill, and hopefully send it to the full House and Senate floors!

-By Bradley Kennedy

Update from Annapolis

Trash Free Maryland is very busy in Annapolis right now, working the General Assembly to pass three bills to reduce trash in neighborhoods and waterways across the state.

The three bills are

- disposable bag fee for Maryland. This is the same bill we've been working for three years; it would enact the same 5-cent fee in DC and Montgomery County for the whole state.
- enabling legislation to allow Prince George's County to create its own bag fee. Again, this is the same as the last two years. See www.CleanPrinceGeorges.com for info.
- a statewide bottle deposit. To learn what a bottle deposit is, see our recent article. Learn more about the campaign at Recycle for Real.

Together these bills will dramatically reduce trash in our neighborhoods, streams, and the Chesapeake Bay. All three bills have significantly stronger support in the Assembly this year than they have in the past. However, we still have a lot of work to do.

Prince George's:
A subcommittee vote could happen as soon as next week. We need to generate lots of calls and show citizen support to the delegates. Here's what you and your members can do:

1. Go to www.CleanPrinceGeorges.com to learn more and sign up for updates.
2. Go to www.mdelect.net and look up your state legislators. Call them and say you support the bag fee (both county and statewide) and you hope they do too.
3. Help us phone bank. The first event will be Monday, January 21 from 5 to 7 pm. You may be able to contribute from home. We need 5 volunteers for this.
4. Help us collect signatures from county residents. These events are every Saturday morning.
5. Meet with your legislator. I can help you set this up. You can also come to the Environmental Summit on January 29 from 4:30-6, in Annapolis. More info here.

Statewide bag fee and bottle deposit:
These bills haven't been introduced yet but we still need to show strong citizen support. Here's how you and your members can help:

1. Go to Recycle for Real to learn more about the bottle bill and sign up for updates.
2. Go to www.mdelect.net and look up your state legislators. Call them and say you support the bag fee and bottle deposit and you hope they do too.
3. Write a letter to the editor of your local paper. Describe how litter affects you. I have a tip sheet ready if you need it.
4. Meet with your legislator. I can help you set this up. You can also come to the Environmental Summit on January 29 from 4:30-6, in Annapolis. More info here.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need any additional information. I have fact sheets and petitions ready to go and can print copies for you. I am also available to present at community meetings.

Also, please let me know if your group is interested in joining the Trash Free Maryland Alliance and/or signing on to the Clean Prince George's coalition. You can also follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Thanks for your great work improving our communities!

Introducing the Community Cleanup and Greening Act of 2012

Last Thursday Delegate Mary Washington (D-District 43, Baltimore City) introduced the Community Cleanup and Greening Act in the House of Delegates of the Maryland General Assembly. Senator Brian Frosh (D-District 16, Montgomery County) introduced the same bill in the Senate on February 2.

The Community Cleanup and Greening Act aims to reduce litter in Maryland's neighborhoods and environment by imposing a five-cent fee on disposable plastic and paper bags. One to two cents stays with the retailer. The remaining proceeds will be split three ways: to purchase and distribute free reusable bags to low-income and elderly residents; for counties to apply to water quality improvement projects; and for the Chesapeake Bay Trust to administer as environmental restoration grants.

"A bag fee can have a substantial impact on litter, because it encourages shoppers to use reusable bags," said Julie Lawson, Organizer of the Trash Free Maryland Alliance. "If the program never collects a nickel, because everyone switches to reusables, we will have achieved our goal."

The legislation is modeled on successful programs in place in Washington, DC and Montgomery County. In the two years since the implementation of the Anacostia River Cleanup & Protection Act, 75 percent of DC residents say they have reduced their use of plastic bags, leading to reduced costs for retailers and fewer bags picked up at river cleanup events. Proceeds of the fee have been used as grants for green businesses and nonprofit organizations working to restore the Anacostia River, as well as for distributing thousands of reusable bags to those in need.

"There is no such thing as a free bag," said Laurie Schwartz, Executive Director of the Waterfront Partnership of Baltimore. "Retailers could see significant cost savings as they will not have to buy as many bags to then give away. Even a small mom-and-pop shop might save over $1,000 a year."

"Litter brings down the quality of life for residents," added Halle Van der Gaag, Executive Director of Blue Water Baltimore. "It is not only visually ugly but contaminates our waterways. Baltimore City spends more than $10 million each year to clean it up, so preventing it in the first place is more sustainable in the long-term."

The Community Cleanup & Greening Act, SB511, will be heard by the Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee on February 28. The hearing on HB1247 has not yet been scheduled.

Who benefits when we reduce our waste?

When you think of trash, and the people who work to combat it, do you mostly think of environmentalists? It's actually a concern to more people than you think!

- Farmers: Plastic bags and other trash get caught in their machinery, and can make livestock sick. The value of a cotton crop falls when plastic gets mixed in, and cleaning the trash out of a cotton gin is dangerous work! Check out this editorial from the Virginian-Pilot about waste-reduction support from the Virginia Farm Bureau.

- Boaters: Ever gotten a bag or fishing line caught around your outboard motor? Not very good for the motor, huh?

- Departments of Transportation: Cleaning up trash from the sides of our highways and byways costs a lot of money. In Maryland, it's as much as $29 per bag of trash collected. The Roanoke Times reported that it's time-consuming too:

[City Councilman Court] Rosen emphasized that the council's support for consideration of the measure resulted from hearing from the city's transportation division that picking up plastic bags along rights of way before mowing was taking more time than the actual mowing.

- Businesses: While many places still give us bags for our purchases for free, they do cost money. A typical grocery store pays 2 cents for each plastic bag, and 5 cents for each paper bag. If we take fewer bags, the business saves money!

- Landfills: They're in the business of taking our trash, but some of our stuff they just don't want. One landfill builder in Maryland says he has to put 40-foot-high fences around new landfills to keep plastic bags inside--otherwise, they catch the wind and just decorate the trees in the area. I'm sure that fence wasn't cheap.

- Food pantries: They serve a vital role in the community, providing food and other services to those in need. But they operate on a shoestring and, just as for their clients, every little bit helps. Bread for the City, a food pantry in Washington, DC, began distributing groceries in reusable bags in 2010, thanks to donations from corporations and grocery stores like Safeway. They made a deal with their clients: Bring back the cloth bags next week, and we'll give you an extra pound of fresh fruits and vegetables. It's been a smashing success. Not only are the families getting more fresh, healthy food, but BFC has saved thousands of dollars by not having to buy new bags every week.

Who else in our community benefits from less trash?