Recycling: Montana stewardship
Ginny Coyle | Hagadone News Network | UPDATED 12 years, 10 months AGO
A recent Daily Inter Lake article alerted the public to the Flathead County Solid Waste District’s review of its current recycling program. It told how the recycling service contract was due to expire and that the next contract bid could likely be 20 to 30 percent higher for the same services. The article also mentioned that rural recycling, in particular, was a challenge because of the associated hauling expenses. It noted that the county was preparing to ask for new proposals as an effort to explore ways to redesign and retain a cost-effective recycling program for the county.
The County Solid Waste District must be praised for joining forces with local businesses, institutions and organizations to acquaint and educate the public with the many forms of recycling currently offered in the valley with the Waste Not Project. They all realize how recycling improves the ability to handle waste in a safe, environmentally effective manner along with conserving the landfill’s waste disposal capacity.
While researching the difficulties associated with the program, I came across some successful strategies used in other rural states that could be developed in the county to increase the program’s overall efficiency. One, which focused on rural and underserved communities, was the Hub and Spoke Recycling model. This system affords the most efficient way of gathering and processing recyclables while greatly reducing transportation costs and requires the least demand of resources. Funding can be introduced to encourage building this framework.
Because individual communities in Montana generally manage recycling activities independently, the necessary scale cannot be obtained and energy is wasted. Counties pooling resources with a multi-jurisdictional approach could help alleviate many waste recycling cost issues. Efforts should be made to publicize the upcoming county’s new request for proposals widely, so as to attract multi-jurisdictional responses. It would be prudent to enhance reduction/recycling in earnest, rather than boost acquisition of land for landfill sites and expansions.
Also, there are new processing facilities located on the west coast now accepting all plastics and other new materials for recycling. This offers the potential in a new contract to divert an even greater volume of recyclable material from the landfill. Any new request for proposals should provide incentives for companies bidding on a contract to collect all plastics as well as other items for which new markets are available.
The Solid Waste District’s Flathead Strategic Plan has already identified and evaluated rail transport of solid waste materials; however, volume would be critical to validate hauling, capital equipment costs, fees and such.
Curbside recycling may not be possible for some time, or at all, outside of city limits but this should not discourage dedicated individuals. Please get in the habit of loading your vehicle with recycle items when heading to the grocery store and drop off items before shopping. It will take both the public and the county working together to create the demand and value for more waste diversion operations to be put in place. Visit the website www.wastenotproject.org and look at the link “Where to Recycle in the Flathead” — there are many products that are locally recyclable.
If we are to preserve a healthy Montana for this and future generations, we must help by communicating support to the county and recycling businesses and spur interest among friends and neighbors. Promoting recycling and expressing the desire to expand on this type of infrastructure can maximize the probability of the program’s profitability and maintainability.
We can all help make a difference. Take waste responsibility seriously, be a good steward and act.
Coyle is a resident of Kalispell
ARTICLES BY GINNY COYLE
Recycling: Montana stewardship
A recent Daily Inter Lake article alerted the public to the Flathead County Solid Waste District’s review of its current recycling program. It told how the recycling service contract was due to expire and that the next contract bid could likely be 20 to 30 percent higher for the same services. The article also mentioned that rural recycling, in particular, was a challenge because of the associated hauling expenses. It noted that the county was preparing to ask for new proposals as an effort to explore ways to redesign and retain a cost-effective recycling program for the county.