Ontario Recycler Workshop

1
Ontario Recycler Workshop

• December 4, 2008

2
Welcome!

• 7th Ontario Recycler Workshop (ORW)
• Presented by
• Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO)
• Stewardship Ontario
• Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO)
• Key areas
• results of EE Fund special projects
• other activities affecting recyclers
• optical sorting technology (OST) application

3
In the Audience

• Representatives of
• Ontario recycling programs (municipal recycling
  co-ordinators waste management staff)
• Municipal staff councillors
• Consultants
• Stewards stewardship program representatives
• 80 in room 50 webcast participants

4
ORW Overview How To

• Full day session (to 3pm)
• EE Fund program project updates
• optical sort technology (OST) feature
• 4 speakers facilitated panel discussion
• Webcast details
• we move slides
• post full webcast slides after ORW

www.stewardshipontario.ca
Questions
Enlarge slide
Volume
5
Todays Topics

• EE Fund Highlights
• CIF update
• WDO report
• Theme segments
• Driving Diversion through Design
• Special Projects
• Lunch
• Optical sort technology panel

6
EE Fund Highlights

• Guy Perry
• Stewardship Ontario

7
What I will Cover

• EE Fund activity review
• Status of EE Fund projects
• The future
• CIF in full swing
• EE Fund project evaluation

8
EE Fund Commitments by Priority Area
9
EE Fund Spending by Geographic Area
10
Status of Projects

• 4 years, 20M allocation approved
• 75 projects in total
• completed projects 45
• projects in progress 30
• expect completion by end of 2008 15
• completion beyond 2008 15
• As projects completed, budgets reconciled
• unspent funds will be transferred to CIF

11
To be Completed

• Optical sorting technology (OST) projects
• testing monitoring plus OST working group
• Recycling training strategy implementation
• Multi-family (MF), Toronto
• Infrastructure capital projects
• MRF upgrades (York, Kingston, Northumberland)
• collection transfer (Woodstock, Peterborough
  County)
• Support projects (Municipal Coordinator)

12
Project Reporting

• Recently completed
• West Perth Blue Box lid pilot (PN 289)
• Conversion of Dryden MRF to Transfer Facility (PN
  12)
• Elliot Lake Multi-Residential Service (PN 241)

• About to be released
• Implementation of a Waste Management Utility in
  Ontario (PN 160)7 Discussion Papers
  Implementation Manual
• Toronto EWSWA cart pilots (PN 60 PN 262)
• Markham QWS Clear Bag projects (PN 285 PN 177)

www.stewardshipontario.ca/bluebox/eefund
13
Communicating EE Fund Results

• Project evaluation in progress
• Project-by-project with agreed metrics
• cost/tonne reduction tonnage increases payback
  period return on investment other results
• what worked/didnt why identify strongest
  elements for future work
• determine how to maximize/build on EE Fund
  investment
• Continue to report at future ORWs

Results to be posted
14
Continuous Improvement Fund Update

• Andy Campbell
• Waste Diversion Ontario

15
CIF is Operational!

• Key committees in place
• Program Manager (Mike Birett)
• Application process available online
• fine-tuning application process approval
  criteria
• applications welcome
• 15 projects approved

Apply now, dont wait!
16
CIF Committee

• Subcommittee of MIPC
• Oversees all CIF business compliance with
  obligations under BBPP CIF Agreement

17
CIF Project Committee

• Mandate review and approve applications
• Recommend large projects to CIF Committee

18
Successful Applications

• Increase effectiveness efficiency
• Increase diversion
• Transferability to other municipalities
• Handle a changing mix of materials
• Define adopt best practices
• Present a good financial business case

19
Applications Contracts

• Application Data Summary at
• www.wdo.ca/cif/applications.html
• Complete 3 sections
• Project description
• Best practice (BP) review
• baseline information to measure BP impacts
• Financials diversion data
• operational/capital projects
• BP study projects
• small other (50K or less)
• Standard form of contract

Application questions? Please call!
20
Project Applications Under Review
21
Approved Projects (2008)
22
Approved Projects Sample

• 40K for co-op recycling plan for 6
  municipalities surrounding Thunder Bay (Gilles
  Twp.)
• 32K to improve depots move to 2-stream
  collection (Seguin Twp.)
• 120K to develop online database of municipal
  recycling contracts
• 70 funding for plastic film handling (Hamilton)

23
2009 Priorities

• 70 funds on efficiency (i.e. reduce costs)
• 30 funds on effectiveness (i.e. increase
  tonnage)
• CIF may call RFPs for projects in specific
  areas to focus spending

Fund first adopters at a higher level
24
CIF Committee 2009 Priorities
3
2
1
4
25
Apply Now!
Novel projects will get funded above 50
www.wdo.cif/index.htm
26
Contacts

• Andy Campbell
• 705-719-7913
• andycampbell_at_wdo.ca
• Mike Birett
• 705-719-7914
• mbirett_at_wdo.ca
• Clayton Sampson
• 519-539-0869
• csampson_at_wdo.ca

27
Waste Diversion Ontario Update

• Glenda Gies
• Executive Director, WDO

28
Updating On

• Blue Box Program
• funding to Best Practices
• BBPP Review Consultation Process
• Status of Other Plans
• implementation development

29
Funding to Best Practices

• Likely to include base funding for all programs
  enhanced BP funding calculated using points
  system
• Mandatory expanded BP questions in 2008 Datacall
• process to evaluate/review program against
  objectives
• types of performance measures used
• assessment of MRF in last 2 years
• single question on joint delivery of services
  into multiple questions by type of service
  actions to synchronize contract expiry dates
• more focused questions on staff training
• MIPCs BP Funding Distribution Working Group
• currently working to assign points to each
  question/ response option

30
BBPP Review

• Public
• 4 focus groups 1,000 person public opinion
  survey
• Facilitated meetings
• AMO/AMRC Waste Management Task Force on Nov 19
• Ontario Waste Management Board on Nov. 24
• Stewardship Ontario Board on Nov 28
• other industry associations on Dec. 12
• environmental non-government organizations on
  Dec. 16
• MIPC-Blue Box on Jan. 7/8

31
BBPP Review

• Draft report to be posted end of January
• Public workshop/webcast mid February
• Written submissions
• by email to BBPPReview_at_WDO.ca
• comments submitted prior to December 31
  considered when preparing draft report for
  consultation
• comments may be submitted until February 27, 2009

32
WEEE

• Phase 1 commencement April 1, 2009
• registration of collectors, reuse organizations,
  processors underway
• audits of processors underway
• RFPs for transport, consolidation, processing
  under development
• Phase 2 due to Minister July 10, 2009
• developing baseline data
• public workshop early February 2009

33
Phase 1 MHSW

• 70 of 103 municipal agreements signed or about
  to be signed
• expect up to 99 by December 15
• Commercial collection locations coming on board
• 250 Rona/Home Depot locations for paint
  batteries
• targeting 50 to100 automotive locations for DIY
  oil filters, antifreeze containers by end of
  year
• Communications launch January 2009
• point of purchase brochures
• print selected outdoor media

34
Phase 2 MHSW

• Program development to date
• Phase 2 definitions
• partial baseline data compiled
• Behind schedule
• draft program plan for consultation should have
  been posted mid November
• Workshop 2 should have been held early December
  
• Extension request expected from Stewardship
  Ontario

35
Used Tires

• Draft preliminary plan for consultation will be
  posted soon at www.ontariotirestewardship.org
• will also be linked from WDO website
• Public consultation workshop
• December 18, 2008
• 830 am to 1230 pm
• Delta Meadowvale (401 Mississauga Road)
• register via OTS website

36
Questions
37
Driving Diversion Through Design

• John Dixie
• Stewardship Ontario
• Moderator

38
Designing Effective Collection Systems

• Changes in collection approach with introduction
  of
• 1 or 2-stream recycling
• expanded BB programs
• bi-weekly garbage collection
• bag limits
• pay as you throw (PAYT)
• organics collection
• Systems drive participation increase diversion
  rates
• Opportunities for improvement
• expand program by using regional MRFs that accept
  a wider range of materials
• increase yield by providing more capacity at curb
• automated carts for single-family collection
• variable rate systems for multi-family collection

39
In this Session

• Prior EE Fund support for collection projects
• Essex-Windsor cart pilot
• Peterborough depots
• Dryden transfer station
• Session focus on learnings from 3 recent EE Fund
  collection projects
• Woodstock MRF to transfer station conversion (PN
  247)
• Toronto single-family cart program (PN 60)
• Toronto multi-family volume-based program (PN 32)

40
Speakers

• David Creery
• City Engineer, City of Woodstock
• Reporting on Woodstocks MRF to transfer station
  conversion
• Kerrie Skillen
• Team Leader, Jacques Whitford
• Reporting on Toronto single-family cart pilot
  studies
• Renée Dello
• Senior Analyst, Waste Diversion Planning, City of
  Toronto
• Toronto single-family cart program roll-out
  update on Toronto multi-family recycling program

41
Woodstock Transfer StationEE Project 247

• David Creery, City Engineer
• City of Woodstock

42
Project Summary

• Project goal
• convert MRF to transfer station
• convert system from 7- to 2-stream collection
• Anticipated impacts
• reduction of labour operational costs
• increase in volume of recyclables collected
• More information
• dcreery_at_city.woodstock.on.ca
• www.city.woodstock.on.ca

43
The Issues

• Inefficient recycling program
• Collection capacity MRF capacity exceeded
• System not able to accommodate additional
  materials
• Labour supply contract deficient

44
The Project (1)

• Convert existing MRF building into transfer
  facility (i.e. send materials to larger MRF)
• convert from 7- to 2-stream collection
• install weigh-scale loading compaction
  equipment
• train new staff in collection materials
  handling
• Public education
• Collection schedule changes to accommodate
  bi-weekly recycling weekly garbage pick-up
• Monitoring (capture rate set out rate survey)

45
The Project (2)

• After

Before
46
Tonnage Financial Impacts

• Project cost 1.02M
• EE Fund support 245K
• Anticipated cost savings 300K/year
• Gross costs decreased from 300 per tonne in
  2007 to 250
• Estimated pay-back 2 yrs
• Tonnage appears to be increasing

47
Results/Findings (to date)

• Currently fibre to Toronto/containers to Guelph
• Not all equipment installed for launch but system
  working well
• PE most successful at messaging change to
  2-stream less so at conveying collection date
  changes
• Additional material results in additional
  collection cost
• Increasing set out noted since launch
• Resident survey results (n300) positive

48
Best Practices/Next Steps

• Best practices
• a smaller program can reduce costs by
  transferring recyclables to a larger MRF
• increased opportunity for diversion by using a
  MRF processing a greater range of materials
• Next steps
• short-term continued monitoring to gauge impact
  on capture rates finalize equipment installation
  
• long-term monitoring arrangement with larger MRFs

49
City of Toronto Single-Family Cart
ProgramPilot Studies City-wide Rollout

• Kerrie Skillen, Team Leader - Solid Waste
  Services, Jacques Whitford Limited
• Renée Dello, City of Toronto

50
Cart Pilot Studies Project Summary

• Project goal
• determine best option for providing increased
  recycling container capacity
• More information
• rdello_at_toronto.ca
• www.toronto.ca/garbage

51
The Issues

• Outgrown original Blue Box (BB) system
• Assumed lack of capacity keeps people from
  recycling more
• 235K grant from EE Fund for pilots to compare
  increased recycling storage options
• Scarborough Downtown Pilots
• Time Motion Study Household Survey Focus
  Groups Waste Audits Ergonomics Study

52
Scarborough Pilot Overview

• 4 Study Areas
• Cart (bi-weekly)
• Weekly Blue Box
• Blue Bag (bi-weekly)
• Control (bi-weekly)
• 4 Monitoring Phases
• Fall 2005 Winter/Spring/Summer 2006
• 620 households per study area
• Similar housing, participation recycling trends

53
Scarborough PilotSet-Out Participation Results

• Cart area highest average set out
  participation rates of all 4 monitoring phases

54
Scarborough PilotSurvey Focus Group Results

• Cart area highest satisfaction rate
• 93 of respondents rated program 8 to 10
• out of 10
• Highest increase in recycling from Cart Area

55
Scarborough PilotErgonomics Assessment

• Cart ranked as most ergonomically preferred
  option
• Little to no manual lifting
• Reduced risk of injury to back, shoulder, elbow,
  wrist from lifting physical fatigue
• 1 drawback where cars are parked, crew has to
  manually roll cart into position
• risk of overexertion injury

56
Downtown Pilot

• 5 neighborhoods in downtown areas chosen with
  representative characteristics
• dense housing
• narrow or no driveways
• limited storage areas
• hills
• on-street parking
• 240L carts delivered to 850 homes

57
Downtown Pilot Survey Results

• Residents preferred carts over traditional BB
  collection
• Concerns expressed
• hard to move up stairs or hills
• can be heavy
• 240L cart difficult to store use

58
City-wide Roll-Out (1)

• Findings from pilot studies led to city-wide
  rollout
• semi-automated recycling cart collection
• delivered to 500K hhld between Dec. 2007 Nov.
  2008
• 3 size options
• Program promoted through
• community newspapers
• transit shelter silver box posters
• staffed mall displays

59
City-wide Roll-Out (2)

• Program evolved to include volume-based rate
  structure for garbage
• Garbage cart delivery started June 2008
• 90 complete

60
City-wide Roll-Out (3)

• Goal move to fully automated collection where
  possible
• Certain areas will never be fully automated,
  i.e., downtown core with on street parking

Fully-automated
Semi-automated
61
Expected Impacts

• Largest variable-rate cart program roll-out in
  North America
• Anticipate 15K tonne increase in recyclables due
  to increased capacity from cart program
• Anticipate 43K tonne increase due to volume-
  based rate behaviour change of both SFD MFD
  program

62
Torontos Integrated Multi-Unit Recycling Strategy

• Renée Dello
• City of Toronto

63
Project Summary

• Project goals
• support overall City goal of 70 diversion by
  2010
• implement volume-based solid waste management fee
• Anticipated impacts
• SWM programs will be funded entirely by user fees
  instead of taxes
• improved recycling rates for multi-residential
  dwellings
• Funding
• 1.9M from EE Fund for communications
  monitoring initiatives
• More information
• email rdello_at_toronto.ca
• website www.toronto.ca

64
The Issue

• Diversion goal huge challenge
• 51 or 540,500 households multi-residential
• Current multi-residential diversion rate 13

65
The Project

• Implement volume-based rate structure using RFID
• Increase education, outreach enforcement
• Combined water/solid waste utility bill sent by
  Revenue Services
• Citys contractor manually tracking number size
  of garbage bins

66
Volume-Based Rate StructureMulti-unit Building
2008 Fees

• Fee for each cubic yard (for building) XL size
• 9.56/cubic yard, uncompacted
• 28.67/cubic yard, compacted

3.0 bags/unit every 2 weeks
2.0 bags/unit every 2 weeks
1.0 bag/unit every 2 weeks
235/unit/yr (157/unit/yr) 78/unit/yr
2/3 bag/unit every 2 weeks
205/unit/yr (157/unit/yr) 48/unit/yr
175/unit/yr (157/unit/yr) 18/unit/yr
150/unit/yr (157/unit/yr) (7)/unit/yr
67
Increased Promotion Outreach (1)

• Undertook targeted advertising
• Public meetings with building owners managers
• Promotional tools (letters, presentations,
  recycle cards, handbook)
• Recycling ambassador volunteer program
• Hiring additional education/by-law officers

68
Increased Promotion/Outreach (2)

• Providing free in-unit recycling containers to
  all multi-residential customers

69
Results/Findings (to date)

• Data has been collected since July 1, 2008, no
  analysis done yet on volume
• contractor noticed decrease in garbage bins set
  out increase in recycling bins
• noticeable increase in contamination in recycling
   
• Challenges
• getting account numbers for all customers (linked
  to water accounts some customers do not have
  meters)
• billing tied to residential units?discrepancies
  between SWM records tax records
• shared collection points
• greater demand on resources to investigate

70
Next Steps

• Proceed with RFID technology for waste containers
• Long-term?phase in RFID for recycling containers
• will enable performance tracking on
  building-by-building basis
• will allow targeted education/communication

71
Questions?
72
Break

• ORW resumes in 20 minutes!

73
Welcome Back!
74
Special Projects

• Rick Clow
• Quinte Waste Solutions

75
Special Projects

• Special because
• highly collaborative
• scope covers broad Blue Box (BB) issues
• provide BB system support through
• direct program support resource person, or
• targets a system need or practice (training,
  material market development)

76
Speakers

• Clayton Sampson, Northern Ontario Program Advisor
  EE Fund PN 157 Ontario Multi-Family Support
• Vivian de Giovanni, Municipal Waste
  Association/Association of Municipal Training
  Coordinators EE Fund PN 341 Ontario 3-Year
  Blue Box Recycler Training Implementation Update
• Guy Perry, Stewardship OntarioPlastics Market
  Development Update

77
Northern Ontario Blue Box Program Technical
AdvisorEE Fund Project 157

• Clayton Sampson
• AMO/Stewardship Ontario/WDO

78
Project Summary

• Project goal
• assist programs to overcome challenges barriers
  inherent to Northern programs
• Anticipated impacts
• improve performance of Northern Blue Box (BB)
  Programs
• More information
• csampson_at_wdo.ca
• www.stewardshipontario.ca

79
The Issue

• How to engage Northern programs to improve their
  BB programs?
• BB recycling is not top responsibility
• competing for time
• Work on barriers faced by programs in North
• geography distance
• limited budget staff resources

80
The Project

• Provide a dedicated resource for Northern Ontario
  programs
• Proactively work with programs to implement best
  practices
• Get out visit with programs to get first hand
  look at situations
• Help programs submit project applications to EE
  Fund (now CIF)

81
Tonnage Financial Impacts

• 27 of ON reporting programs in North
• Northern programs account for 7 of total BB
  program cost
• The North accounts for 5 of ON tonnage
• Gains can be made to improve program performance
  with relatively simple solutions
• e.g. improve depot signage, add more depots,
  more/more effective promotion education to
  improve capture

82
Site Visits

• 30 programs visited
• Most programs doing best they can
• seeking assistance ideas
• Impact of on-site interaction
• highlighted simple opportunities to increase EE
• program operators demonstrate great interest in
  implementing program enhancements
• Share ideas, information options fit to
  northern program realities

83
Locations

• Black RiverMatheson
• Blind River
• Chapleau
• Dryden
• Elliot Lake
• Fort Frances
• Kapuskasing
• Kenora
• Kirkland Lake
• Laurentian Hills
• Longlac
• Manitoulin Island
• McDougal Township
• North Bay

• Ottawa Valley
• Parry Sound
• Red Rock
• Sault Ste. Marie
• Schreiber
• Seguin Township
• Sioux Lookout
• Smooth Rock Falls
• Sudbury
• Tarbutt Township
• Temiskaming Shores
• Terrace Bay
• Thunder Bay
• Timmins
• West Nippising

84
Results/Findings

• Key to project proactive networking, on-site
  collaboration
• provide information
• learn about provide information to address
  issues
• Result in 5 current CIF projects
• additional applications in development
• new issues, new ideas
• Projects in early stages results to come

85
Best Practices

• Current projects underway in North are best
  practice oriented
• optimizing operations (Fort Frances)
• multi-municipal co-operation/recycling planning
  (Thunder Bay area townships)
• enhancing promotion education (Black
  River-Matheson)
• Project effective for promoting best practices to
  programs

majority of projects in progress now are under
CIF
86
Next Steps

• Project wraps at end of 2008
• Final project report will be completed posted
  on Stewardship Ontario website
• Project reports will be posted on CIF website
• Anticipate CIF will continue with concept

87
Municipal Multi-Residential Recycling Support

• Clayton Sampson

88
Project Summary

• Project goal
• improve increase capture of BB material from
  multi-residential (MR) sector through provision
  of a resource person
• Anticipated impacts
• raise profile of MR recycling increase
  effectiveness efficiency of programs
• provide link to CIF to help fund promote
  implementation projects
• More information
• csampson_at_wdo.ca

89
Background (1)

• Multi-Residential Working Group (MRWG) formed in
  2004
• EE Fund project 215 provided support for MRWG
  to develop assess projects
• Undertook background survey (EE Fund project
  18) to gage status of MR recycling programs
• results most programs did not have good costs,
  tonnages diversion information on MR recycling
  

90
Background (2)

• MRWG initiated other EE Fund projects to get
  better information ideas on MR recycling
• enhancing recycling in Multi-residential
  Buildings in Markham, Richmond Hill, Vaughan (PN
  186)
• focus groups/interviews with tenants,
  superintendents property managers (PN 199)
• project to acquire analyze MR diversion cost
  data in 8 programs (PN 201)
• Working group members undertook projects focused
  on MR recycling
• MRWG provided a forum networking opportunity to
  discuss move forward

91
Results/Findings

• Great potential to improve MR recycling programs
• EE Funding for MRWG fully expended in 2008
• Need to dedicate time resources to MR recycling
• develop coordinated approach
• MRWG scratched the surface
• Application made to CIF for dedicated support
  position

92
Multi-Residential Support Position

• CIF project 113 approved in September
• possible 2 year program
• year 1 funding approved
• Funding provided for a position to support
  municipal MR programs projects
• EOI issued for municipal secondment, successful
  in obtaining qualified responses
• Anticipate project will begin in January, 2009

93
Next Steps

• MRWG to act as sounding board to direct efforts
  
• Proactive initiatives with municipalities to
  enhance MR recycling implementation
• Bring forward projects to CIF to enhance MR
  recycling
• Municipalities encouraged to participate on MRWG
  to increase networking value engage MR resource
  person in project support
• Report at next ORW

94
3 Year Ontario Blue Box Recycler Training Program

• Vivian De Giovanni
• Municipal Waste AssociationAssociation of
  Municipal Recycling Coordinators

95
Project Summary

• Project goal
• 3 year program
• core training 200 existing municipal staff
  trained certified with 50 new entrants in field
  
• specialized training 140 individuals
• Anticipated impacts
• assist inform program decisions
• re cost capture
• More information
• vivian_at_amrc.ca
• www.amrc.ca

96
Program Origins

• 2 EE Fund-supported projects
• BB Program Enhancement Best Practices
  Assessment Project (2007)
• identified staff training as a best practice
• 3 Year Blue Box Recycler Training Strategy
  Implementation Plan (2007) needs study
• confirmed interest (survey, targeted interviews)
  in municipal BB-specific training

97
Project Outline

• Implement 3-year, 1.75M strategy
• Develop deliver training with 2 elements
• core (foundation) training to cover broad range
  of competencies at high level
• specialized training in PE, markets marketing,
  contract management data management
• Aided by steering group subject team
• input for training coordinator (MWA/AMRC)
  curriculum developer (Jacques Whitford)

98
Project Deliverables

• Core Training to be piloted Spring 2009
• Courses include on-line in-class components
• 1st delivery of specialized courses

99
In Progress...

• In place steering group, subject matter team,
  training coordinator curriculum developer
• Kick-off meeting September 11/12, 2008
• Collaborative approach working well
• high quality input from steering content groups
  
• Developing core training content

100
Best Practices

• Ensure this best practice delivered to high
  standard incorporates input from steering
  content development teams

101
Next Steps

• Collaboration continuing with steering content
  groups
• content exam questions being developed (Winter
  2008, Spring 2009)
• Will seek test group for piloting
• Core curriculum ready for piloting by March 2009
• Curriculum developer for specialized modules
  selected through RFP process
• agreement pending
• Training will be offered starting in 2009!

102
Developing Markets for Blue Box Plastic
Packaging in Ontario

• Guy Perry
• Stewardship Ontario

103
Todays Session

• Recap Stewardship Ontarios BB Plastic Plans
• All Bottles Plus Tubs Campaign in Brockville
• REOI for processing capacity
• RFP for re-processing capacity

104
Blue Box Plastics Plan

• Analysis of opportunities costs to increase
  Blue Box plastics recycling in Ontario (RW Beck,
  2007)
• 2.4M fees from stewards of plastics
• 2-track approach

105
All Bottle Plus Communications Demonstration
Project

• Purpose to deepen capture of core materials
• immediate impact
• learn what works prepare for outreach to
  municipalities
• Brockville selected
• June campaign
• Advertisements used for this are available
  through WDO

106
Demonstration Project Results

• Recall of advertisements high unaided aided
• Highest for direct mail highlighting PET water
  bottle
• Hits to www.blueboxmore.ca increased
  significantly
• Recovery rates generally increased

small component of stream some conflicting
promotion information in public
107
REOI Results

• Consulted with municipalities plastics
  recycling industry in May June
• Issued REOI June 30, 2008
• Closed July 18, 2008
• 8 companies responded
• CPRA, EFS, Entropex, Haycore, HRL, Intercoat,
  Merlin, Nexcycle
• Interviews with 7 companies during July August

108
Key Findings from REOI (1)

• Address film rigid plastics 1 to 7 as
  different streams
• Engage with re-processors who are linked to end
  users (i.e. not just MRF operators)
• best way to identify high-value applications
• ensures most flexibility lowest risk
• greater chance to secure other interests,
  stakeholders potential funders
• greater chance to identify promote closed loop
  options
• Investments required now in positive sort
  technologies/systems in MRFs for plastics
• to provide better throughput quality assurance

109
Key Findings from REOI (2)

• No consensus on timing for a large solution
• Constraints of conventional RFP process (as was
  done for glass)
• significant uncertainty re plastics composition
  supply
• common municipal contract (achieved with glass)
  very difficult
• length of contract (unlike glass) an issue
  regarding pricing
• likely to be a protracted process
• Other funding may be available
• FCM, SDTC, Ontario auto sector strategic
  investment funding

110
RFP for Plastics Re-processing

• Proceed with competitive process
• open to all, not just REOI respondents
• RFP purpose
• solicit proposals for re-processing BB plastic
  packaging from Ontario BB programs marketing
  resultant product(s)
• RFP focus
• 1 to 7 rigid plastic packaging
• proposals need to go beyond bottle grade 1 2
• recyclable film plastic

111
Key Elements of RFP

• Seeking proposals from re-processors
• prepare plastics for direct use by end markets
• not just prepare materials to broker to others
• Ontario location
• Joint initiative-CIF Stewardship Ontario
• 1.9M from Stewardship Ontario
• 1.9M from CIF
• address possible collection/processing impacts
• support long-term municipal contractors
• independent decisions whether to proceed with any
  proposal

112
Evaluation Based on 5 Criteria
113
Successful Respondents

• 2-step Process
• Proposal evaluation
• 1 or more preferred respondents
• Municipal involvement
• Due diligence negotiations
• 1 or more successful respondents
• develop contracts with municipalities

Funding provided only if contracts secured for
municipal material
114
Comparison to Glass RFP

• Similarities
• seeking solution from marketplace
• Stewardship Ontario offer of financial assistance
• require contracts with municipalities to receive
  funding
• work closely with municipalities
• Plastics RFP differences
• 2-step process-ask what market can do before
  compiling municipal material
• quantities composition of material unknown
• information to allow Stewardship Ontario
  municipalities to assess what needs to be done to
  commit specific materials
• allows preferred respondent(s) to put together
  appropriate business case system impacts

115
Working with Municipalities

• After selection of preferred respondent,
  Stewardship Ontario CIF work with
  municipalities
• identify available plastics meeting respondents
  specifications
• provide data for respondent(s) to complete a
  business case
• Assess most beneficial result for province of
  Ontario
• based on business case for proposals available
  material
• To prepare for negotiations
• Stewardship Ontario CIF to compile data on
  quantities composition of potentially available
  plastics

Contact mlalani_at_stewardshipontario.ca
116
Timeline
Allow for possible Round 2 depending on quality
of proposals
117
Questions?
118
Enjoy your lunch!
119
Welcome Back!
120
Afternoon Program

• Optical Sorting Technology (OST)
• presentations by municipal representatives
• OST panel discussion
• questions
• Wrap-up

121
Optical Sorting TechnologyPresentations Panel
Discussion

• Guy Perry
• Stewardship Ontario

122
Optical Sorting Projects

• EE Fund supported OST
• Others being installed /or operating
• Ottawa, Hamilton, Northumberland
• Additional installations being planned
• OST working group to review findings from EE
  Fund OST projects to provide information re
  performance role of OST
• todays panel to report on discuss EE projects
  to date

123
Session Agenda

• 4 presentations from OST communities
• represents 4 out of 5 EE Fund OST projects
• Panel discussion follows
• Then open discussion
• questions for panelists
• what do you need to know?

124
Speakers Panelists

• Craig Bartlett, Region of Durham
• Jake Westerhof, Canada Fibres Ltd. (Dufferin
  installation, Toronto)
• Cameron Wright, Essex-Windsor Solid Waste
  Authority
• Dan Lantz, METRO Waste Paper Recovery
• Other people are available to comment

125
Regional Municipality of DurhamDual Stream
Optical SortersEE 237

• Craig Bartlett
• Manager of Waste Operations

126
Project Summary

• Highlights
• in Durhams 2-stream system (fibres/containers),
  new MRF uses dual-functioning Pellenc optical
  sorters to further separate plastic bottles
  containers
• first of their kind in Canada offering recovery
  rate of about 97
• first unit separates PET HDPE plastics.
• second unit separates tubs, lids gable/aseptic
  containers
• More information
• craig.bartlett_at_region.durham.on.ca
• www.durhamregionwaste.ca

127
The Issue

• Majority of MRFs use contracted staff resources
  to manually-sort various grades of plastic
  containers
• Manual sorting method is less efficient less
  effective with increasing volumes
• longer operating hours
• increased energy for processing
• increased labour costs

128
The Project

• Total project cost 634,500 plus GST
• incl. equipment, installation, controls wiring
• EE Fund contribution 317,250 plus GST
• 2 state-of-the-art optical sorting systems
  specifically designed, custom-built installed
  to sort
• PET HDPE
• tetrapak/aseptic polycoat containers
• plastic tubs lids

129
Tonnage Financial Impacts

• MRF began full processing operations January
  2008
• Revenues under review
• Possible increase of regional revenues through
  short-term sale of existing excess processing
  capacity

130
Results/Findings

• When operational, sorting lines increase, process
  more containers in shorter time period with
  improved quantities quality of product going to
  end market
• Experienced alignment problems associated
  downtime which has resulted in manual sorting
• Loss of productivity
• More technical investigation required to reduce
  the possibility of equipment failure

131
Best Practices

• OST has tremendous benefits in terms of
• lower operating costs
• reduced electricity natural gas consumption
• higher recovery of target plastics containers
• greater quantities, higher-quality products,
  for industrial buyers
• Automated system expected to set new processing
  standard as best practice in recycling
  operations

132
Next Steps

• Upon completion of commissioning the facility,
  Region will retain a consultant to provide
  analysis
• Expectations of optical sorters include
• throughput of up to 7 tonnes per hour along
  container processing line
• minimum Recovery Rate of 97 of plastics
• meet or exceed market specifications

133
City of Toronto Vanley MRFPlastics Optical
Sorting TechnologyEE Fund 210

• Jake Westerhof
• Canada Fibers Ltd

134
Project Summary

• Retrofit of existing container line with optical
  sorting technology
• RFP for design, procurement, installation
  commissioning of an optical sorting system
• detailed evaluation of responses from PELLENC
  MSS
• evaluation team included Stewardship Ontario,
  City of Toronto, Gartner Lee, CFL
• install during 10 day shutdown (February 2008)
• Commissioning included performance testing

135
Project Summary

• Project goals
• reduce labour costs while maintaining throughput
  levels material quality
• evaluate effectiveness efficiency of optical
  sorting technology as part of Torontos goal of a
  highly automated 3rd MRF
• Anticipated impacts
• reduction of 3 sorters/shift increased recovery
  of PET polycoat/aseptic containers improved
  consistency of material quality
• More information
• jakew_at_canadafibersltd.com
• www.canadafibersltd.com

136
Equipment Costs

• Pellenc Optical Sorter
• Mistral 12-05T Dual Valve
• Conveyor(s) modifications
• Perforator to improve material stabilization
• Disc screen (2½" minus) to remove fines
  increase life of downstream components
• 1.4M capital cost
• 700K EE Fund
• 700K Toronto

137
Schematic

• Bottom valve block ejecting PET upwards
• Top valve block ejecting polycoat aseptic
  containers downwards

138
OST Project
139
Recovery Financial Benefits

• 200K per year operational savings
• Year-to-year increase (adjusted for growth)
• PET 12
• Polycoat 25
• Increased market revenues from sale of additional
  recovered material

Average Tonnes/Month (March-October)
140
Results/Findings

• Realized labour savings increase in recovery
• Technical problems include
• air qualityfilter replacement
• temperature issues
• faulty valves, full replacement
• recognition issues
• no local (GTA) technical expertise
• Commissioning results below expectations (second
  valve block performance)

141
Performance Test(_at_ 2,400 to 2,750 kg/hr
throughput)

• PET (bottom valve)

• Polycoat (top valve)

• 90.5 recovery
• 91.0 purity

• 84.5 recovery
• 80.5 purity

142
Next Steps

• Testing of other sorting parameters on second
  valve block
• Continued monitoring ongoing improvement
• Build internal technical expertise through
  additional training
• Project report to be completed in 2009

143
Optical Sorting Equipmentfor Plastics
PaperEE Fund Projects 260 261

• Cameron WrightManager of Waste Diversion
• Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority

144
Project Summary

• Project goal
• use optical sorting for plastics fibre in 2
  stream/mid-size MRF
• Anticipated impacts
• higher efficiency
• lower processing costs
• improved material quality capture
• More information
• cwright_at_ewswa.org
• www.ewswa.org

145
The Issue

• What problem was OST intended to solve?
• low capture rates
• loss of single serve PET
• high manual separation
• health safety issues

146
Tonnage Financial Impacts

• Cost total project 2.7M
• fibre 350K
• container 240K
• EE Fund contribution 544K
• Anticipated cost savings to be determined
• base case 7 sorters?containers 7 sorters?fibre
• OST requires 6 sorters?containers 4
  sorters?fibre (theoretically)

147
Sorting Labour (1)

• Container Line (with Optical Sort)
• 4.5 tonnes/hour
• 1 to 2 pre-sort
• 1 glass
• 1 aluminum quality control (QC)
• 1 HDPE QC
• 1 PET QC
• 3 manual sorters for PET, HDPE, poly-coat,
  aluminum foil, paper, tubs lids

148
Sorting Labour (2)

• Fibre Line (with or without Optical Sort)
• 8 tonnes/hour
• 2 pre-sort
• 1 OCC QC
• 5 ONP QC

149
Results/Findings (to date)

• Material quality better
• Material capture appears much better (especially
  OCC PET single serve)
• Containers processed
• on 1 day shift
• Notable improvement
• in material quality

150
Lessons Learned

• Container optical
• A/C unit inside panel
• nozzles replaced
• conveyor ripped apart (poor vulcanization)
• Fibre optical
• humidity
• unable to distinguish between OBB ONP
• low bridge height of unit causes many jams
• infrared unit heats up bags stick to it
• slow in-feed required

151
Need to Know

• Fibre optical (infrared) technology not proven
• Container optical?problems appear similar to
  those experienced elsewhere in Ontario
• Installation start-up delays
• Ensure technology could be demonstrated in
  2-stream Ontario MRF application prior to award

152
Best Practices

• Everyone looking for more efficient, less
  labour-intensive means to process
• Technology exists for removing containers is
  very effective
• Reduces sorting hours
• Reduces repetitive motion

153
Next Steps

• Containers
• reduce pre-sort by 1 sorter
• continue to performance-test
• evaluate residue levels capture rates
• track quality
• Fibres
• eliminate fibre optical system
• examine ONP screen application
• performance test
• status report currently being completed

154
Scarborough MRF Fibres Optical Sorters

• Dan Lantz
• METRO Waste Paper Recovery

155
Project Summary

• Project goal
• reduce cost of ONP processing
• improve quality of ONP
• Anticipated impacts
• reduction of up to 10 sorters per shift
• ONP with less than 10 outthrows prohibitives
• More information
• dlantz_at_metrowaste.com
• www.metrowaste.com

156
The Issue

• 22 sorters for ONP cleanup
• Prohibitives outthrows too high
• particular concerns with plastic film, PET, OBB

157
The Project

• Remove 4 ONP quality control lines
• replace with 296 dual eject optical sorting
  units
• Installation completed in October 2007

Before
After
158
Financial Impacts

• Overall cost of installation in excess of 2.1M
• 1.6M for equipment
• 0.5M for local work
• Reduction of 8 sorters
• net savings of approximately 475K per year
• EE Fund contribution (incl. GST) 1.037M

159
Results/Findings (to date)

• Overall, ONP quality marginally improved
• Issues with consistency
• OBB VERY difficult to identify
• Increasing inbound residue making material harder
  to manage

160
Best Practices

• Optical sorting for ONP does help save money
• Inbound product quality critical
• Not expected to be really efficient to manage
  OBB white OCC
• Not suitable for 2-stream programs
• Best practice? Better practice that still
  needs development

161
Next Steps

• Requires a lot of ongoing monitoring
• Must track changes in the inbound stream
• Extending ONP QC lines to allow for additional
  ONP improvements
• affects payback/cost effectiveness
• Report is in very final stages
• Metro would do it again
• installing optical sorters for ONP in new Calgary
  facility

162
Panel Discussion
163
DiscussionMain Topics

• Recognition recovery
• Throughput
• Operational Issues
• Cost
• Monitoring
• Future developments

164
DiscussionTopic 1

• Recognition recovery
• recovery rates for target materials
• acceptable?
• likely to improve?
• levels of contamination
• acceptable?
• likely to improve?
• recognition issues
• can they be mitigated?

165
DiscussionTopic 2

• Throughput
• what is range of throughput level?
• are they acceptable?
• can they be improved?

166
DiscussionTopic 3

• Operational Issues
• what are the key operational challenges and how
  can they be mitigated?
• are there situations which, if they exist, make
  OST unworkable

167
DiscussionTopic 4

• Cost
• can/should we define threshold situations
  (materials, throughput, etc.) in which OST can
  economically be applied

168
DiscussionTopic 5

• Monitoring
• what monitoring should be done, by whom?
• how should monitoring be structured?
• how should results be disseminated?

169
DiscussionTopic 6

• Future developments
• is there anything we should be telling equipment
  suppliers for future development?

170
DiscussionMain Topics

• Recognition recovery
• Throughput
• Operational Issues
• Cost
• Monitoring
• Future developments

171
Questions?
172
Concluding Remarks

• Watch www.stewardshipontario.ca
• EE Fund project wrap-ups reporting
• plastics market development information
• More information about CIF start-up coming soon
• Stay tuned through In-the-Loop, Recyclers
  Knowledge Network, EE Fund CIF webpage
• Thank you to all ORW speakers!
• slides available at ORW webpage

173
Thank you!
www.stewardshipontario.ca/bluebox/eefund www.recyc
lersknowledgenetwork.ca www.wdo.ca/cif