Partnering Up to Collaborate on Cans...Steel Cans 1,480,000 1,126,674 182,383 1,309,058 88% Percentage of All Generated Cans in U.S. Homes (in tons) Material Pounds of Annual Generation

Partnering Up to Collaborate on Cans

Dylan de Thomas, The Recycling PartnershipCMI Annual Meeting

May 14, 2020

recyclingpartnership.org

We’re all in this bin together

recyclingpartnership.org

Before we got to this…

A Little History…

A Little History…

to

<0%Infrastructure GrantsReduce Contamination and Increase ParticipationDrive Regional and Statewide System ChangeConnect Peer-to-Peer NetworksAdditionally, more than 500 communities representing 30 million households have downloading our free videos, campaigns, social media kits and tech tools.

Helping CommunitiesDrive National Recycling System Change Coast to Coast

Making an Impact…

Setting the Stage

$43Min new infrastructure with city matching

$8Min carbon savings

$7Min new recyclables collected

$2Min member consulting

$8Min technical assistance to cities

$74MTotal Value

2020

State of CurbsideRecycling Report

Estimate of Number of Households with Various Kinds of Recycling Access

Subscription-based Curbside (Assumed Uptake of Service)

6%

Subscription-based Curbside

(No Uptake of Service)14%

No Recycling Services Available

6%

Curbside Access Total 59%

Estimate of Annual Tonnage of Curbside Recyclable Material Generation by U.S. Single-Family Households

Scenarios of Estimated Total Annual Collection Cost for U.S. Curbside Recycling

What About Cans?What About Cans?

EPA Total Generation 2017

Facts and Figures

Single Family Estimate

Multifamily Estimate

Total Residential Estimate

Percent Generated in

Homes

Aluminum Cans 1,390,000 1,002,515 162,285 1,164,800 84%

Steel Cans 1,480,000 1,126,674 182,383 1,309,058 88%

Percentage of All Generated Cans in U.S. Homes (in tons)

Material Pounds of Annual Generation

Percent of Generation

Cardboard 106.76 13.9%Mixed Paper 302.51 39.4%Aseptic & Gabletop Containers 6.07 0.8%PET Bottles 50.92 6.6%Non-bottle PET 10.77 1.4%HDPE Natural Bottles & Jars 10.54 1.4%HDPE Colored Bottles & Jars 16.16 2.1%Glass Containers 156.44 20.4%Steel Cans 23.15 3.0%Aluminum Cans 20.60 2.7%Aluminum Foil & Trays 5.63 0.7%Other Plastic Packaging (~#3-7s) 34.32 4.5%Bulky Rigid Plastics 23.86 3.1%Total Pounds/HH 767.74 100%

Average Generation Per Single Family Household per Year

Where Are The Cans?

We Go and Find Them!

Capture Rate Studies

Main Technique: Cart-Based Sampling

Alternative Technique: Coordinated “back of truck” studies of Waste Composition and Inbound Recycling Composition

RECYCLABLES

TRASH RECYCLABLES

TRASH

Where Is It? – Garbage or Recycling?

Single-Family Generation is About 20 Lbs/Year

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

Atlanta

Chicago

Denver

Atlanta

Chicago

Denver

Denver

Anonym

ous

Seattle

Charlotte

Faye

ttevil

leAus

tin

Durham

Ft W

orth

Minneapolis

Nashvill

e

Saraso

ta C

ounty

Belle

vue

Phila

delphia

SWACO #

1

Lbs of Cans Generated

Average Across Community Studies

19.54 lbs.Source: The Recycling Partnership Database

Total Lbs of CansDeposit Cans Recovered

Non-Deposit RecoveredAway from Home

SF Homes with CurbsideSF Homes W/O Curbside

MF Homes

0

500000000

1000000000

1500000000

2000000000

2500000000

3000000000

Assumptions~91 billion cans sold annually in U.S.Cans/lb. – 34.5Estimated Deposit Recycle Rate Average – 85%Estimated Non-Deposit State Average – 30%SF and MF HH Numbers and Occupancy Rates – U.S. CensusHome vs Away from Home Estimates – The Recycling Partnership

Lost or Landfilled

Recovered

2.637B

520MM298MM

598MM

547MM

462MM

212MM

Where Are the Cans Today?

Where TRP is Focused

Generated

CAPTURE RATECardboard 79%Natural HDPE Bottles 71%Glass 63%Mixed Paper 60%Colored HDPE Bottles 58%PET Bottles 55%Aluminum Cans 53%Aseptic/Cartons 50%Steel Cans 47%Bulky Rigid Plastics 44%Other plastic packaging (#3 - 7s) 33%

Overall average 61%

Average Participant Capture Rates

How Can We Capture More Cans?

Our Approach to Generate more Supply of Recyclables

Infrastructure

CompleteInfrastructure

Modernize Infrastructure

Educate to Drive Participation, Quality

Targeted Education

ApproachLbs Lost

200

400

600

700

800

Curbside in Carts, GoodEducation

Curbside in Carts, No Educaton

Curbside In Bins

Curbside Opt-In

No Curbside

Continuum of Curbside

Lbs LostLbs Captured

800 lbsof recyclables available

in HH

Access to Recycling: A Glimpse Into the Fate of CansImpact on Can Loss

NO CURBSIDE or DROP-OFF AVAILABLE6% of U.S. Households

CURBSIDE through Subscription20% of U.S. Households30% service uptake; 60% Capture/ per Participant

DROP-OFF ACCESS ONLY21% of U.S. Households

CURBSIDE IN CARTS – ROBUST EDUCATION22% of U.S. Households80% Participation; 75% Capture per Participant

CURBSIDE IN CARTS – LIMITED EDUCATION22% of U.S. Households65% Participation; 60% Capture per Participant

All 20 Pounds of Aluminum Cans per HH Lost to Trash

CURBSIDE in BINS9% of U.S. Households

17 Pounds of Aluminum Cans per HH Lost to Trash

16 Pounds of Aluminum Cans per HH Lost to Trash

14 Pounds of Aluminum Can per HH Lost to Trash

12 Pounds of Aluminum Cans per HH Lost to Trash

8 Pounds of Aluminum Cans per HH Lost to Trash

Type of Access

348 lbs/HH 450 lbs/HH

• 2.7 more lbs of aluminum cans• 3 more lbs of steel cans

Average Grant Results

102 more overall lbs per HH =

Material Category Capture Rate Before Carts

Capture Rate After Carts

Corrugated Cardboard 82.5% 90.6%Aseptic and Gable Top Cartons 32.1% 35.1%Mixed Paper (Recyclable) 53.1% 63.6%PET Bottles and Jars 62.0% 74.0%Other PET Packaging 32.1% 43.0%Natural HDPE Bottles and Jars 81.1% 88.5%Pigmented HDPE Bottles and Jars 66.4% 70.0%Other HDPE Containers 64.5% 17.5%PP Bottles and Containers 24.2% 50.4%Aluminum Cans 53.6% 75.5%Steel Cans 62.0% 78.8%Glass Containers 62.4% 72.0%

Carts Helps Metal Capture – Red Wing MN

Cleaning It Up for Cans

Inbound Contamination

Addressing Material Quality

What Communities Control

Sorted at MRF

+

What MRFs Control

Commodity BaleContamination Residue

Inbound Contamination

What Communities Control

Important Role of Haulers

What MRFs Control

Commodity BaleContamination

Residue

General January to April MRF 2020 ValuesJanuary 2020 Scenario April 2020 Scenario

Assumed % January Pricing Value Assumed % April Pricing ValueOCC 18.00% $25.00 $4.50 OCC 18.00% $73.13 $13.16Mixed Paper 36.00% -$1.88 -$0.68 Mixed Paper 36.00% -$1.88 -$0.68Aseptic 0.40% $22.50 $0.09 Aseptic 0.40% $22.50 $0.09PET 4.40% $217.00 $9.55 PET 4.40% $192.60 $8.47HDPE-Natural 0.90% $1,186.00 $10.67 HDPE-Natural 0.90% $737.60 $6.64HDPE-Color 1.10% $281.80 $3.10 HDPE-Color 1.10% $94.80 $1.04Bulky rigid plastics 0.40% $48.80 $0.20 Bulky rigid plastics 0.40% $47.60 $0.193-7 Plastic 1.00% $5.00 $0.05 3-7 Plastic 1.00% -$3.80 -$0.04Aluminum 1.00% $1,023.00 $10.23 Aluminum 1.00% $796.00 $7.96Steel Cans/ Ferrous Metal

1.80% $125.94 $2.27 Steel Cans/ Ferrous Metal

1.80% $94.38 $1.70

Glass (3 mix) 18.00% $20.71 $3.73 Glass(3 mix) 18.00% -$26.79 -$4.82Residue (Trash) 17.00% -$50.00 -$8.50 Residue (Trash) 17.00% -$50.00 -$8.50

100.00%Blended Value $35.20

100.00%Blended Value $25.22

Assumed MRF Processing Cost $90 Assumed MRF Processing Cost $90

MRF profit/(loss) ($54.80) MRF profit/ (loss) ($64.78)

Confidential – Not for External Sharing

BEFORE AFTER

22.01%12.42%

Example of Recycling Partnership Contamination Work

Fairfield OH - 44% Reduction in Contamination

METAL CAPTURE RATE DETAIL Before and After Data 2017 Pilot Areas - Single-Family - Curbside Service

*Based on The Recycling Partnership’s Atlanta Can Capture study, Numbers are representative of the kind of data we are seeing from capture studies across the US.

Education

Source: The Recycling Partnership’s Can Capture Study Data

20%

Direct Education in Action

We CAN Do Better

Cross-City Analysis – Relative Aluminum Can Generation

Aluminum Can Generators Aluminum Cans Discard Distribution for Aluminum Cans% samples (n)

Lbs/hh/mo% of

generationAtlanta 81% (228) 2.55 100%High Generators 41% (114) 4.49 88%Low Generators 41% (114) 0.61 12%Chicago 80% (231) 1.37 100%High Generators 23% (67) 3.48 74%Low Generators 57% (164) 0.51 26%Denver 85% (424) 1.97 100%High Generators 38% (188) 3.68 83%Low Generators 47% (236) 0.60 17%Phoenix 75% (237) 2.01 100%High Generators 35% (109) 3.66 84%Low Generators 41% (128) 0.61 16%

Confidential – Not for External Sharing

High Can Consumers are Key• High can consuming HHs are

generating $30 - $40 of aluminum per HH/yr

• 38% of HHs are high can consumers but they represents 82% of can generation (consistent with 2017 data)

• For high can consumers - 50% are recycling most of their cans; 25% are recycling some; 25% are not recycling

Can We Capture More Metals?

Cities:

• Nashville• Omaha• Milwaukee• Detroit• Baltimore• Syracuse• Pittsburgh• Kansas City• Chattanooga• Indy

Progress in Engaging Large Cities – Volume

Multi-Family Projects – Behavior/In-Home Containers

Cities:

• Raleigh• Orlando• San Marcos• Detroit• Dallas/Ft Worth• Minnesota• Atlanta

Harmonization of Messaging to Drive Consistency of Recycling Education

The BIG PICTURE – More Recycling with Multiple Strategies

Optimization to Improve Quality and Get More Tons

Technical Assistance to Help Cities Implement Changes

Supporting Cities Investment in Infrastructure without Grants

Infrastructure Grants to Cities

Infrastructure Grants Communities• Auburn, AL• Bergenfield, NJ• Bristol, RI• Chattanooga, TN• Columbia, MO (Multi-Family)• Culver City, CA• Dickinson, ND• Garland, TX• Iowa City, IA• Nashville, TN• Milwaukee, WI• Raleigh, NC (Multi-Family)• Red Wing, MN• Sarasota, FL• Sedalia, MO• Stratham, NH• SWACO, OH (Columbus)• Ventnor City, NJ• Vineland, NJ

Statewide Partnerships• State of Minnesota• State of New Mexico• State of Tennessee• State of Ohio• State of Washington

Optimization and Participation Communities• Atlanta, GA• Dallas/Fort Worth,

TX• Denver, CO• El Paso, TX• Essex County, NJ• Las Cruces, NM• Houston, TX• Orlando, FL• West Coast

Contamination

Can We Get More Heavy Metal?

We CAN Capture More Metals!

InterventionHouseholds

Reached(in millions)

Industry Investment

(in USD millions)

New Pounds Collected(in millions of pounds)

PET HDPE PP OCC Mixed Paper Glass Aluminum Steel

Conversion from bins to

carts4 $104 30 14.4 9.6 72 192 96 7.2 9.6

Optimization of recycling behavior

7 $28 26 5.4 3.6 63 168 84 6.3 8.4

New curbside access 3 $78 74 36 24 180 180 240 18 24

New multifamily recycling access

4 $40 74 30 18 180 480 240 18 24

TOTAL 18 million households

USD $250 million

204 million pounds

85.8 million

pounds

55.2 million

pounds

495 million pounds

1.32 billion

pounds

660 million pounds

49.5 million pounds

66 million pounds

“Unlocking Supply”

More Metals!• Support for Community

Programs• More Access Means More

Cans• Cleaning Up Capture

Behavior • Tapping into Multifamily with

In-Home Infrastructure

Additional Slides

Top Ten Non-Deposit ‘Can States’

2.1

2.1

2.2

2.5

2.6

3.1

3.4

3.5

5.0

7.1

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0

New Jersey

Colorado

Arizona

Georgia

North Carolina

Pennsylvania

Illinois

Ohio

Florida

Texas

Top Ten Non-Deposit Can Sales, Adjusted

Billio

ns o

f Can

s

Can sales per state were taken from

Aluminum Association 2008 data and

reduced proportionally to reflect lower overall

national can sales.

Can sales from Top 10 ‘Non-Deposit’ States represent 33.5 billion cans, or close to 1B lbs of aluminum used.

Assuming a recycling rate of ~30%, this leaves an opportunity of about 680 million lbs. in these 10 states alone.

Confidential – Not for External Sharing