Ontario Recycler Workshop

1
Ontario Recycler Workshop
Slide 1

• November 23, 2007

2
Welcome!
Slide 2

• 5th Ontario Recycler Workshop
• Joint initiative of
• Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO)
• Stewardship Ontario
• Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO)
• Participants from across the province beyond
• municipal recycling co-ordinators/waste
  management staff, Councilors, consultants,
  stewards stewardship program representatives

3
Goals for the Day
Slide 3

• Update on the Effectiveness Efficiency (EE)
  Fund as a whole
• Update on some key EE funded projects/ priority
  areas
• Discussion of next stepsmoving from EE Fund to
  new Continuous Improvement Fund (CIF)

4
Our Audiences
Slide 4

• In person (80)
• Webcast audience (40)
• listening with slides, on-line
• type in questions or comments directly on webcast
  console
• Archived webcast slides available at

www.stewardshipontario.ca
5
Agenda
Slide 5

• EE Fund Report
• Multi-family recycling issues projects
• Report on Optical sorting technology projects
• Break (lunch!)
• Recyclers Knowledge Network (RKN)/best practices
  project update
• Continuous Improvement Fund (CIF) planning

6
Poster Session During Break
Slide 6

• Enviro Net PilotChristine Baker, Municipality of
  West Perth
• Quinte Clear Garbage Bag PilotRick Clow, Quinte
  Waste Solutions
• Blue Box Lid Clear Garbage Bag Project, Peter
  Veiga, Town of Markham
• Online Survey Blue Box Recycling Training Needs
  Assessment Alex Hogan Associates

7
EE Fund Overview
Slide 7

• 10 of industry contribution to municipalities
• 19.75M available over first 4 years
• 16.35 committed to date3.4M still available to
  end of June 2008
• Objectives
• reduce system cost
• minimize cost increases as recovery increases
• build capacity for sustainable recycling system
• 64 projects approved to date (consolidated)

8
EE Fund Spending by Priority Area - new
Slide 8
9
EE Fund Spending by Geographic Area
Slide 9
10
Moving from Best Practices (BP) to Continuous
Improvement
Slide 10

• Minister still requires that stewards pay 50 of
  BP system costs
• Still soliciting projects to determine how to
  implement BP
• Added emphasis on system capital
• Focus on
• fundamental BPs measuring impacts of other
  practices
• training
• modifying RKN adding information on BP
  continuous improvement, supporting training

11
Capital Projects Infrastructure Planning
Slide 11

• 7M in capital projects to encourage efficiency
  innovation for infrastructure/technology, e.g.
• optical sorting installations (Toronto, Durham,
  Scarborough, Peel)
• multi-family (MF) recycling equipment (Toronto,
  Elliot Lake)
• automated transfer system (Dryden)
• carts automated collection (Toronto,
  Essex-Windsor)
• glass clean-up technologies (York)
• Infrastructure planning
• London regional MRF
• exploring cooperative planning

12
EE Priorities for Next 6 Months
Slide 12

• Expanding RKN with development of training
  presenting BP project results
• Training strategy as per BP report
  recommendations
• Promotion Education (PE) best
  practicesworkshops/TV /print/web/radio pilot
• Technology installations/improvements/transfere.
  g. optical sort
• Inter-regional planninge.g. new MRFs plastics
  processing
• MF residential

13
Getting the Word Out
Slide 13

• RKN current, topical content by for ON
  recyclers, including move to training forum
• Hands-on resource people
• A-Team Northern Ontario Blue Box Program
  Technical Advisor
• special assignments to BP Enhancement project
• peer review of contracts
• MF working group
• In-the-Loopquarterly newsletter
• ORWspring fall each year
• Posting reports project evaluations 30 posted
  to date

14
Going Forward
Slide 14

• Transitioning from EE Fund to Continuous
  Improvement Fund
• double the funding available to municipalities
• greater support to applicants (e.g.
  new/independent dedicated fund manager reporting
  to MIPC) to reporting results
• more proactive approach to supporting system
  improvements

EE Fund applications always welcome!
15
Multi-family Issues in Municipal Residential Blue
Box Recycling
Slide 15

• Phil Jensen
• Stewardship Ontario

16
Multi-family Opportunities Challenges
Slide 16

• MF residents comprise nearly a quarter of ON
  population
• Issues are common but complex
• Studies point the way, implementation becoming
  the focus
• Multi-residential task group (EE Fund 215)
  generating ideas, needs willing hosts

17
Other Multi-family Projects
Slide 17

• Baseline MF recycling studies
• AMRC6 communities
• Essex-Windsor
• Using focused PE to optimize MF recycling
  performance
• Enhanced recycling in MF buildings in Markham,
  Richmond Hill Vaughan
• MF system improvements in 7 communities (AMRC)
• MF working group support (AMRC)
• Elliott Lake MF recycling
• MF waste audits waste audit results analysis

18
Speakers
Slide 18

• Liz Parry, Stewardship Ontario Stewardship
  Ontarios MF waste audit project
• Peter Kalogerakos, Region of Peel On-board weigh
  scales for MF recycling
• Nicole Dufort, City of TorontoReaching MF
  households an insider look at Toronto's
  strategic planning

19
Multi-family Waste Audits
Slide 19

• Liz Parry
• Stewardship Ontario

20
Project Summary
Slide 20

• Project goal conduct waste audits in ON
  multi-family (MF) buildings
• Anticipated impacts data set to support present
  future work in MF recycling
• Email lparry_at_stewardshipontario.ca
• Website www.stewardshipontario.ca/eefund/projects
  /audits/waste_audit.htm

21
Why Does Stewardship Ontario Conduct MF Audits?
Slide 21

• Blue Box Program Plan directs Stewardship Ontario
  to complete residential waste audits every year
• Lack of MF baseline waste composition data
• Different communities use different methodologies
  
• Data collection analysis can be difficult to
  manage
• Large volumes of material makes auditing
  expensive
• Health safety issues

22
41 MF Audits 9 Municipalities
Slide 22
23
The Process
Slide 23

• Waste collection, sampling sorting material
  from MF buildings
• work with partner municipalities contractors
• buildings represent mix of housing types serviced
  by partner municipality
• baseline data can be used by all programs with MF
  residential housing

24
Audit Process
Slide 24

• Standard sampling sorting protocol for MF
  buildings
• Every year
• identify partner municipalities sample
  buildings
• collect analyse data
• develop generation, recycling garbage estimates
  for variety of materials

25
Waste Audit Data
Slide 25

• Stewardship Ontario uses waste audit data to
• assess waste generation for setting fees
  (cross-check with stewards reports)
• determine recovery performance of existing
  programs
• assess opportunities priorities to improve
  recovery

26
Findings (1)
Slide 26

• Confirms that MF recycling performance weaker
  than in single family households
• MF audits more complicated to implement than
  single family audits
• cost
• health safety concerns
• High volume of material

27
Findings (2)
Slide 27

• Based on average of results (no accounting for
  time of year, building size or urban vs. rural)
• Total waste generated per household per year is
  600 kg/hh/yr
• 40 of paper and paper packaging is captured
• 50 of core blue box material is captured

28
Best Practices
Slide 28

• Provides baseline information for studies
  focusing on MF performance
• AMRC study building characteristics related to
  recycling performance
• barriers to participation
• limitation to data as presented online
• Continued analysis to consider
• MF versus SF performance
• materials to target
• differences between buildings
• impacts of recycling set-up carts, chutes,
  labeling

29
Next Steps
Slide 29

• Continue to analyze data
• Working on plans for 2008
• Results available at www.stewardshipontario.ca

30
Onboard Weigh ScalesA Multi-Residential
Weight-Based Waste Recycling Generation Pilot
Slide 30

• Peter Kalogerakos
• Region of Peel

31
Project Summary
Slide 31

• Project goal pilot the use of onboard scales to
  measure generation of waste recycling on a per
  building basis
• Anticipated impacts
• identify buildings with low diversion rates
• provide framework for User Pay System
• Email peter.kalogerakos_at_peelregion.ca
• Website www.peelregion.ca/waste

32
The Issues
Slide 32

• Diversion rates in Multi-Residential (MR) sector
  very low
• Currently, no efficient method to track waste
  generation diversion per building
• Diversion rates vary from building to building
  - usually dependent on
  convenience, commitment from building management,
  recycling capacity
• No accountability for poor recycling rates /or
  excessive waste generation

33
The Project
Slide 33

• Two front end garbage trucks two side-loading
  recycling trucks outfitted with onboard scales
• Weight data used to
• calculate waste generation rates
  (kg/building/week)
• calculate waste diversion rate per building
• calculate average density of compacted/un-compacte
  d waste single stream recyclables
• target buildings with low diversion rate
• measure impact of front-end recycling collection
• Relatively low capital operating costs

34
Implementation
Slide 34

• Submit application for EE funding
• Establish agreement with waste collection
  contractor
• to allow installation of onboard scales on trucks
• to have drivers operate the scales
• to allow the necessary wireless communications
• Purchase install onboard scale system
• Establish test data communication between
  trucks remote servers
• Begin data collection

35
Onboard Scale Data Flow
Slide 35
36
Tonnage Financial Impacts
Slide 36

• Total Project Cost 100,000
• includes scale hardware, software, modems, 1 year
  wireless service fee, 1 year server hosting fee
• does not include in-kind staffing costs, cost for
  additional years of wireless service server
  hosting
• Tonnage Impacts
• no anticipated change in tonnage
• scales can measure changes in tonnage as result
  of program enhancements i.e. front-end recycling,
  user pay system

37
Project Deliverables
Slide 37

• Diversion rates for buildings in Peel Region
• Average generation rates (kg/hh/week) for garbage
  recycling streams
• Average density of compacted/un-compacted garbage
• Average density of single-stream recyclables
• Evaluate potential of scale system for use as
  tracking system in user pay program for MR
  properties

38
Best Practices
Slide 38

• Project 123 pilots a measurement tool
• Onboard scales may prove to be best practice for
  program-wide recycling measurement
• Onboard scales can measure effect on recycling
  rates due to MR program changes i.e. front-end
  recycling, PE outreach efforts, user pay system

39
Next Steps
Slide 39

• Data collection to commence before end of 2007
• Trucks to be rotated through routes to collect
  data from all MR buildings over pilot period
  beyond
• Results will be available November/December 2008
• average waste densities
• diversion rates
• waste generation rates
• scale performance

40
Planning Multi-family Communications
Slide 40

• Nicole Dufort
• Manager, Communications Consultation
• City of Toronto

41
The Project
Slide 41

• Project goal Increase diversion rate (by
  launching volume-based rate structure in MF
  buildings receiving City collection by July 2008)
• Impacts Develop recycling plans in MF buildings
• More information
• Nicole Dufort 416-392-296 ndufort_at_toronto.ca
• Katie Herbert 416-397-5001 kherber_at_toronto.ca
• www.toronto.ca/recycle

42
Project
Slide 42

• Toronto rolling out new multi-unit programs
• Multi-unit residents primary audience for first
  time
• Communications planning public education
• Most municipalities facing same daunting
  challenge
• Change attitudes persuade people to alter
  behaviour
• Move through 4 stages

1) sensitizing 3) conviction (the why) 2)
awareness 4) action (the what)
43
Following Social Marketing Principles
Slide 43

• Theoryawareness alone wont change behaviour or
  attitude
• Knowing the Why, the motivators, important so
  is knowing barriers to behavioural change
• Barriers may include inconvenience, commitment,
  cost
• By determining barriers can produce tools to
  overcome them
• Our first step? Getting to know our audiences!

44
Getting to Know Our Audience
Slide 44

• Strategic approach starts with target audience
• We ask ourselves questions about our audience,
  their current behaviour how to persuade them to
  adopt new behaviour

E.g. Who are they? What are their
socio-economic physical characteristics?
What do they value? What are barriers to
reaching them? How receptive to adopting new
behaviour?
45
Questions Behaviour
Slide 45

• Is it new? How much change from current
  behaviour?
• What specifics are they being asked to do?
• What skills needed to make changes?
• What are barriers to adopting new behaviour?
• One-time action or permanent change?
• Easy or hard? i.e. convenient? time-consuming?
• Is there negative or positive reinforcement? i.e.
  What are the rewards/incentives? What penalties
  for not doing it?
• Will there be peer pressure for or against?
• What tools are they being provided?

46
And We Do Research
Slide 46

• Often make assumptions but research is better
• qualitative, e.g. focus groups
• quantitative, e.g. telephone surveys
• 2 audiences
• building owners/managers/supershave had industry
  meetings used others research findings
• residentsfocus groups in plan
• assuming daunting due to transience, language
  cultural differences, lack of ownership of
  waste, space issues, etc.
• census data says condo owners increasing

47
Building Owners, etc. (1)
Slide 47

• Based on our homework so far, tactics will
  include
• information sessions
• template for Recycling Improvement Plan
• recycling handbook (in multiple languages)
• website info with Customer Service phone e-mail

48
Building Owners, etc. (2)
Slide 48

• Newsletter
• Posters stickers
• Sample letters signage
• Recycling card for residents

49
Residents
Slide 49

• Tactics will include
• focus groups
• advertising campaign
• door-to-door newsletters
• website
• info for councillors newsletters
• info package for tenant boards/committees
• personal visitsmay use resident advocates

50
Optical Sort Projects
Slide 50

• Peter Watson
• Durham Region

51
Why a session on Optical Sorting Technologies?
Slide 51

• Optical sorting is new to Ontario (ON)
•  pre 2007 1 Blue Box MRF with optical sort for
  containers in ON
• 4 new installations in 2007 expect more to come
• 3 in single stream MRFs 1 in a 2-stream MRF
• This session focuses on
• what we are learning from recent installations
• costs benefits
• what does the future hold for automating MRFs?

52
Other Optical Sort Projects
Slide 52

• Feasibility Study for GTA Centralized Plastics
  Recovery Facility
• Optical Sorting Equipment for Essex-Windsor MRF
  Phase 1 RFP Process

53
Speakers
Slide 53

• Al Metauro, Metro Waste Paper Recovery
  Inc.Optical Sort Installations Plans in
  Scarborough, Ottawa, Durham
• Dave Gordon, Region of Peel Single Stream MRF
  Optical Sortation of Plastics
• John Baldry, City of TorontoOptical Sorting for
  Plastics at the Dufferin MRF

54
Optical Sorting Equipment Enhancing Fibre Quality
Slide 54

• Al Metauro, CEO
• Metro Municipal Recycling Services Inc.

55
Project Summary
Slide 55

• Project goal improve quality of 8 ONP sorted by
  single stream systems
• Anticipated impacts increase mechanical sorting
  efficiency decrease processing costs
• Email ametauro_at_metrowaste.com
• Website www.metrowaste.com

56
Issue
Slide 56

• Disc screen efficiency is not 100
• 8 ONP shipped to end markets exceeding allowable
  outthrows contaminants
• Manual sorting is not
• efficient to meet
• required throughput

57
The Project
Slide 57

• Assess operational efficiencies financial
  return of optical sorting technology
• remove contaminants from paper fibre sorting
  lines
• yield mill acceptable 8 ONP

58
Implementation
Slide 58

• Minimizing impact on production
• scheduling extra production days prior to tear
  down
• prepare site in advance wiring, platform
  extensions, pre-assembly, air lines
• installation schedulearound the clock shifts
• Nothing we would do differently
• No surprises

59
Pre Optical Sorters
Slide 59
4 Sort Lines 6 Sorters/Line Capture Rates 44
by weight 26 by units Contamination 4 to 8
60
Tear Down to Start Up in 7 Days
Slide 60
2 Optical Sorters 5 Sorters/Line Throughput
Data n/a
61
Tonnages Costs
Slide 61

• Changes in tonnages
• line speed at 90 currently
• will be able to meet pre production throughput
• Cost Issues
• project cost appears to be on plan
• in process of determining cost savings
• financial issues project delay impact on ROI,
  lost production due to additional days to install

62
Findings to Date
Slide 62

• Project meeting expectationquality is improved
  labour is on plan
• Learning curveprogramming equipment to meet our
  needs
• No real problems to dateupgrade conveyor belts
• Approach proving positive considering volume
  throughput

63
What We Are Measuring (1)
Slide 63

• Preequipment installation measurements
• Pre Sort Line determined material composition by
  analyzing material units average weight/linear
  meter of belt
• ONP QC Line ran line with no sorters to
  determine the of non paper unitsran line with
  sorters determined units captured
• Other Measurements efficiency of the screens

64
What Were Measuring (2)
Slide 64

• Postequipment installation measurements
• same data will be collected
• pre-sort data will be used to ensure material
  composition is consistent
• throughput will be measured against manufacturer
  specs

65
Reporting Results
Slide 65

• Results to be summarized in report for
  distribution by Stewardship Ontario
• primary focus ability of equipment to maintain
  consistent mill quality
• financial analysis to determine cost savings
  quality benefit against investment
• With data collected programming perfected use
  data to set standards for justifying this
  equipment in other facilities

66
Optical Sorter Technology for Plastic Containers
Slide 66

• Dave Gordon
• Region of Peel

67
Project Summary
Slide 67

• Project goal increase recovery rates of
  container materials at MRF
• Anticipated impacts Optical Sorting Technology
  (OST) will enable automated sortation of PET
  increase efficiency of manual sorters on
  container line
• Email dave.gordon_at_peelregion.ca
• Website www.peelregion.ca/waste

68
Issue
Slide 68

• Recovery rates for several container materials
  lower than rates required in contract
• Changes in PET container volume composition
• growth in single serve
  water bottles
• continued development
  of lighter weight PET
• Change in PET straining manual sorters ability
  to achieve required recovery rates on containers

69
The Project
Slide 69

• Installation of OST unit to sort PET containers
  prior to container sorting line
• selected MSS Sapphire dual eject unitpriority
  will be to sort PET will have capability to sort
  an additional container material
• installation to include Automated Drum Separator
  to remove 2-dimensional objects (flatssmall
  fibre film plastic) prior to OST unit

70
Implementation
Slide 70

• OST system scheduled for installation early in
  2008
• Equipment ordered Region reviewing
  configuration, layout final design
• WMCC contractually obligated to install
  commission OST no later than April 13, 2008

71
Tonnage Financial Impacts
Slide 71

• Cost
• 1.5M capital to purchase install equipment
• 750K for equipment
• 750K for retrofit installation
• estimated increase in annual revenue 260K
• estimated annual labour savings 180K
• project cost split between Region of Peel, Waste
  Management of Canada Corporation Stewardship
  Ontario
• Increased diversion tonnage
• 670 tonnes of PET annually

72
Results/Findings (to date)
Slide 72

• Performance of OST Automated Drum Separator in
  US MRFs was impressive
• OST should improve MRF performance increase
  required recovery rate of PET potentially other
  container material
• Would likely include OST in design spec for any
  new MRF

73
What Were Measuring
Slide 73

• MRF had to meet 3 performance hurdles during
  commissioning
• achieve throughput of 35 tph
• achieve material-specific recovery rates
• achieve defined market specs for all container
  material
• Region has detailed information on material
  stream composition facility performance through
  completion of 2 acceptance tests
• Once OST equipment is installed, WMCC
  contractually obligated to demonstrate that 93
  PET capture rate can be achieved

74
Reporting Results
Slide 74

• Report will be prepared by Region to review
  assess recovery rates on all container material
  pre post installation of OST equipment

75
Next Steps
Slide 75

• November 2008finalize equipment layout design
• December/January 2008install equipment
• February 2008commission test
• April 2008report on findings

76
Dufferin Optical Sortation
Slide 76

• John Baldry
• City of Toronto

77
Project Summary
Slide 77

• Project goal
• minimize manual sortation of containers
• Anticipated impacts
• lower cost
• higher quality
• Email jbaldry_at_toronto.ca

78
Why Optical Sortation for Containers?
Slide 78

• Presently all sortation done manually
• Leads to unsatisfactory capture rates
• Quality issues
• improved ability to high grade plastics streams
• possible reallocation of sorters to other
  material streams
• PVC contamination

79
Key Factors in this Project
Slide 79

• Installing optical sortation equipment at
  Torontos Dufferin MRF facility
• will be installed commissioned in February 2008
• Facilitated by
• co-operation of contractor, Stewardship Ontario
  City of Toronto
• shared funding (725K grant from Stewardship
  Ontario)
• Impacts on efficiency?
• to be proven after installation
• capture purity anticipated to be at least what
  is achieved with manual sorting

80
Implementation
Slide 80

• City assigned 3 staff to assist in making project
  go forward
• initial feasibility study
• 1 month total staff time to date since July 6,
  2005
• sufficient skills knowledge available between
  the 3 parties
• Key learnings
• feasibility study to consider options other
  technology which materials should be optically
  sorted
• realistic timelines for project
• evaluation of peripheral equipment
• placement of Quality Control sorters
• Late request to consider additional sortation of
  fibre/poly hot drink paper cups

81
Expected Impacts
Slide 81

• Costs savings
• project cost 1.5M
• anticipated cost savings 185,000/year
• other financial issuesCanada Fibers will accept
  up to 5,000/ year maintenance
• Tonnages
• no changes at time of launch but redundancy built
  in

82
What Were Measuring
Slide 82

• Pre-installation
• equipment installation measurements
• audits of inbound mix
• measurements of production volumes
• Post-installation
• equipment installation measurements
• monitoring protocol under development

83
Results Findings to Date
Slide 83

• Pre-installation monitoring to determine
  composition of container line residue (material
  weights counts)
• Pre-installation waste composition data provides
  information on feedstock

84
Reporting Results
Slide 84

• Once post-installation monitoring complete,
  report on
• labour savings
• capture rate impacts
• down time analysis
• maintenance costs
• end-market response (quality price)

85
Next Steps
Slide 85

• Equipment ordered from Machinex
• Installation planned for late February/early
  March 2008
• MRF to be shut down for 1 week
• Source separated recycled materials (SSRM)
  inventory plan to be developed to accommodate
  shut-down period
• May use findings to choose equipment for new
  facilities

86
Municipal Recycling Training Strategy
Slide 86

• Alexandra Hogan Associates

87
Project Summary
Slide 87

• 3 year training plan for Ontario recycling
  program operators
• General need identified through Best Practices
  Enhancement Project
• Strategy will identify focus on required skills
  knowledge, implementation
• Email alex_at_hoganonline.ca

88
Steering Committee
Slide 88

• Bonnie Ballam (Toronto)
• Linda Churchill (Waterloo)
• Lindsay Milne Rob Rennie (Peel)
• Bruce Dodds (Elizabethtown-Kitling)
• Gary Everett (WDO)
• Geoff Love (Stewardship Ontario)
• Phil Jensen (Stewardship Ontario)

89
Key Features
Slide 89

• Situation analysis needs assessment
• focus on your needs challenges
• priority training topics
• appropriate learning methods
• potential development delivery partners
• certification for some or all of training
• Seeking input from all in ON municipal recycling
• 10 to 15 minutes for needs assessment e-survey

90
Next Steps
Slide 90

• Share your views at www.wdo.ca
• Focus on
• skill/knowledge gaps
• barriers to training
• potential for certification
• Report (Dec.) data research input from
  steering committee project team ? strategy
  recommendations

91
Help Us Assess the Need
Slide 91

• Dont miss this opportunity!
• 2 survey stations set up in lobby during lunch
• Take 10 minutes to get your thoughts on record
• Thanks!

92
Summary
Slide 92
93
Enjoy your Lunch!ORW resumes at 115 p.m.
Slide 93

• To complete the Blue Box Recycling Training
  Needs Assessment Surveysee Latest News at
• www.wdo.ca

94
Welcome Back!
Slide 94
95
Moving Forward in Recycling
Slide 95
96
Afternoon Agenda
Slide 96

• Clayton Sampson, WDOORW Seminar Series
  Northern Technical Advisor Activities
• Francis Veilleux, Bluewater Recycling
  AssociationBest Practices on Recyclers Knowedge
  Network
• Glenda Gies, WDOContinuous Improvement Fund

97
Whats New?
Slide 97

• Clayton Sampson
• WDO Northern Technical Advisor
• CSampson_at_wdo.ca

98
2 Topics Today
Slide 98

• ORW Seminar Series introduced 2 new seminars
  yesterday this morning
• Sustainable Finance
• Promotion Education
• Role as Northern Technical Advisor for WDO

99
ORW Seminars Sustainable Finance
Slide 99

• Municipal experiences in financing waste
  management as self sustaining cost centre
• Staff elected officials representing 4
  communities
• Geoff Rathbone Councillor Adam Giambrone, City
  of Toronto
• Anne-Marie Fowler, City of Ottawa
• Todd Pepper Councillor Rob Schmidt, Essex
  Windsor Solid Waste Authority
• Francis Veilleux, Bluewater Recycling Association

100
Sustainable Finance Seminar Achievements
Slide 100

• Introduced study (to be completed December 2007)
• Profiled Sustainable Finance (SF) activities in
  the 4 ON municipalities
• Gained perception of SF issues from Councillors
  in 2 communities (Toronto Essex-Windsor)
• Participants discussed SF challenges

101
ORW Seminars Promotion Education
Slide 101

• Explored core elements of successful Promotion
  Education (PE) for recycling
• Communications industry municipal
  representatives
• Alfred von Mirbach, REIC Perth
• Anne Boyd, City of London
• Barbara McConnell, Stewardship Ontario
• Clayton Sampson, WDO
• Joe McKenna, Durham Region
• Laurie Watt, Simcoe Media Group
• John McIntyre Peter Sellers, ad agencies
• 60 municipal staff responsible for or
  interested in communications process

102
PE Seminar Highlights
Slide 102

• Presentations discussions on
• strategic communications planning
• budgeting (costing frequent PE tactics)
• benchmarking measuring PE impact
• building good relationships with media
• developing advertising with social marketing
  messages

103
Seeking Feedback on Seminars
Slide 103

• Seminar slides webcast (with discussion) at
  www.stewardshipontario.ca/eefund/orw/orw_main.htm
  
• Feedback needed!
• do municipal staff want more PE training?
• are seminars best presented in person, online or
  both?
• future topics?

104
Northern Technical Advisor Activities
Slide 104

• EE Fund Project to provide a support position
  for Northern Ontario (NO) programs
• Best Practice Project identified desire to have
  dedicated support to NO programs
• Build on A-Team concept

105
Northern Ontario Barriers
Slide 105

• Lack of technical support
• Difficult to proactively network
• Limited resourceshuman, financial
• Geography
• Lack of competition

106
Project Goals Activities
Slide 106

• Contact /or visit most NO programs
• Provide basic technical operational advice
• Coordination/facilitation to help deal with
  distance, isolation lack of competition

107
Project Goals Activities
Slide 107

• Develop networking links within the north with
  south
• Assist to develop messaging specific to northern
  issues
• Enhance effectiveness efficiency of NO programs

108
For More Information
Slide 108

• Email csampson_at_wdo.ca
• Telephone [phone]
• Cell phone [phone]

109
Our Next Speakers
Slide 109
110
Focus on Change!
Slide 110

• Changes that will impact all Ontario municipal
  blue box residential recyclers
• new opportunities through redesign, retooling
  relaunch of Recyclers Knowledge Network (RKN)
• EE Fund developments
• expanded Continuous Improvement Fund

111
Introducing
Slide 111

• Francis Veilleux, Bluewater Recycling
  AssociationBest Practices Project on RKN whats
  coming how you can use it
• Glenda Gies, WDOWhat is the Continuous
  Improvement Fund?

112
Best Practices Recyclers Knowledge Network
Slide 112

• Francis Veilleux
• ORW

113
Best Practices
Slide 113

• Defined as
• Identifies 8 Fundamental Best Practices
• Applicable to all programs

Waste system practices that result in attainment
of provincial and municipal Blue Box material
diversion goals in the most cost-effective way
possible
114
Best Practice Recommendation
Slide 114

• Objective
• make best practices information recommendations
  more accessible
• Tactic
• distill post in bite-size chunks on the
  Recyclers Knowledge Network

115
Recyclers Knowledge Network
Slide 115

• Launched in 2006
• Managed by Stewardship Ontario
• Municipal recycling program resources
• Promotion and Education
• Sustainable Financing
• User Pay
• 1 vs. 2-Stream
• Rural Depots

116
Knowledge Network Makeover
Slide 116

• New look
• New functionality
• New login page
• Easier navigation
• Lets see together!

117
Log-In
Slide 117
118
Home Page
Slide 118
119
Click on Doors
Slide 119
120
Best Practices
Slide 120
121
Multi-Municipal
Slide 121
122
Best Practices
Slide 122
123
Promotion Education
Slide 123
124
Best Practices
Slide 124
125
Decision Tree
Slide 125
126
CommunityProfile
Slide 126
127
Continuous Improvement Fund
Slide 127

• Glenda Gies
• Waste Diversion Ontario

128
Cost Containment Plan
Slide 128

• Approved by Minister in December 2004
• Requires that net cost funding reflect best
  practices in 2008
• To meet this objective, MIPC undertook best
  practices study
• Blue Box Program Enhancement and Best Practices
  Assessment Project Report
• Volume 1 identified best practices
• Volume 2 cost model

129
Best Practices Report
Slide 129

• Identified system needs
• capital investments
• route optimization
• increased PE
• training (including workshops)
• co-ordination standardization among programs
• northern regional support

130
Implementing Best Practices
Slide 130

• Recommended that EE Fund
• be used strategically to overcome barriers
• avoid funding projects that would be implemented
  anyway
• intervene in marketplace where appropriate
• provide technical or facilitation assistance
  rather than direct funding where appropriate
• support projects with province-wide and/or
  regional benefits
• act as a catalyst to spur other investment
• support new applications of proven technologies
  MRF rationalization
• including capital investment where appropriate

131
Best Practice Cost Model (1)
Slide 131

• MIPC updated cost model with 2006 data
• MIPC then calculated series of optional best
  practice system costs by applying variety of
  assumptions such as
• container/processing equipment amortization
  periods
• management training PE cost allowances
• MRF capacity equipment efficiencies

132
Best Practice Cost Model (2)
Slide 132

• MIPC then compared
• optional best practice system costs from 131.5M
  to 148M
• reported 2006 Blue Box net system cost 133M
• MIPC agreement
• use reported 2006 net system cost for setting
  fees for 2008
• allocate 20 of stewards contribution to
  municipalities to directed Continuous
  Improvement Fund
• Continuous Improvement Fund (CIF) to
• replace EE Fund
• start in 2008

133
CIF Intended To
Slide 133

• Support implementation diffusion of best
  practices
• increase public awareness public participation
• rationalize identify new approaches for
  existing infrastructure
• develop new infrastructure as required
• provide training
• promote measure continuous improvement

134
Continuous Improvement Fund (1)
Slide 134

• Shift responsibility to MIPC for
• development/approval of operating procedures
• approval of fund expenditures
• Funds will roll over for 3 years
• Continuation of fund allocation to be
  reviewed after 3 years
• recognizes longer project lead times duration
• should CIF be discontinued, remaining funds will
  be distributed to municipalities

135
Continuous Improvement Fund (2)
Slide 135

• Fund to be segregated
• administered by Stewardship Ontario
• with annual audited financial statements
• Incremental administration costs to be covered
  from fund
• dedicated fund manager to be hired
• Blue Box Assistance Team will report to manager

136
Continuous Improvement Fund (3)
Slide 136

• Strive to balance funding for continuous
  improvement with ensuring reasonable equality in
  access
• MIPC municipal representatives may, collectively,
  apply to CIF for additional staff analytical
  support for Blue Box Program Plan implementation
  issues

137
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
Slide 137

• CIF agreement outlined in MOA
• Approved signed by
• WDO
• Stewardship Ontario
• AMO
• City of Toronto

138
Next Steps
Slide 138

• Development of CIF Strategic Plan to address
• purpose
• measures of success
• operating governance structure
• guiding principles for fund expenditures
• MIPC held retreat in early November, supported by
  consultant
• Timeline for next steps
• draft preliminary Strategic Plan to MIPC for
  review late November
• draft final Strategic Plan to WDO Board for
  approval mid- December

139
In conclusion...
Slide 139

• More information
• email glendagies_at_wdo.ca
• website www.wdo.ca

140
Questions Answers
Slide 140
141
Wrap-Up
Slide 141
142
Thank You
Slide 142

• To view presentations webcast archive,
• visit www.stewardshipontario.ca