This Chapter's... |
strategy |
Sustainability Plan / Solid Waste / Strategy |
goals | To convert our waste-minded culture and attitudes to a resource-efficient ethic. | ||||||
To maximize sustainable uses of natural resources and to eliminate solid waste generation. |
|||||||
|
|||||||
long-term objectives | Waste Generators | ||||||
Materials-Handling Infrastructure |
goals | |||
To convert our waste-minded culture and attitudes
to a resource-efficient ethic. To maximize sustainable uses of natural resources and to eliminate solid waste generation. |
|||
long-term objective | |||
A. The San Francisco population has been educated about the value of natural resources and motivated to reduce their consumption and disposal. | |||
5-year objective | |||
A-1. Public education programs have been expanded -- targeting students, residents, workers, and visitors -- demonstrating the value of natural resources and instilling a resource-efficient ethic. | |||
actions | |||
A-a. Continue working with homeowner associations,
neighborhood groups, building managers, and recycling providers to encourage residents
to recycle. A-b. Increase the use of hands-on environmental education in schools to promote the value of natural resources and the need for waste prevention and recycling. A-c. Expand “shop environmentally” programs to increase consumer awareness about resource-efficient products and packaging. A-d. Develop waste reduction training and education programs for businesses. A-e. Educate visitors about San Francisco’s recycling
programs. A-f. Advertise and promote the successes of city-wide
efforts to reduce disposal and increase waste reduction and recycling. A-g. Promote community-based programs that recycle materials, provide jobs for disadvantaged individuals, and educate residents about waste prevention. A-h. Educate designers, architects, and contractors about resource-efficient design and building for reuse and recyclability. A-i. Increase the use of multi-lingual educational and promotional materials that focus on waste reduction. |
long-term | |||
B. Per-capita waste generation has been reduced by 100%. | |||
5-year | |||
B-1. Per-capita waste generation has been reduced
by 50%. B-2. 85% of households participate in a recycling program. |
|||
actions | |||
B-a. Increase and publicize incentives to encourage
residential participation in recycling and waste-reduction programs. B-b. Promote home composting and develop convenient composting options for apartment dwellers. B-c. Encourage involvement in community-based composting projects such as community gardens. |
|||
long-term | |||
C. All San Francisco businesses and institutions have eliminated solid waste generation. | |||
5-year | |||
C-1. 75% of San Francisco businesses and institutions
participate in a recycling program. C-2. The use of reusable products and packaging has increased. |
|||
action | |||
C-a. Increase and publicize incentives to encourage commercial participation in recycling and waste-reduction programs. C-b. Create a refuse rate structure that encourages commercial recycling and waste reduction. C-c. Coordinate promotional and outreach messages
and technical assistance to businesses. C-d. Gather and publicize success stories on how much money local businesses and institutions have saved by systematically implementing recycling and waste-reduction programs. C-e. Promote San Francisco as a business-friendly community by:
C-f. Encourage suppliers to ship goods in returnable
packaging. C-g. Organize a summit between manufacturers, recyclers, and materials suppliers to discuss ways to incorporate “design for recycling” into product development. C-h. Update The Bay Area Green Pages and promote environmentally friendly businesses. C-i. Increase use of diaper services at institutional settings (such as hospitals and clinics). C-J. Require newspaper and magazine distributors with public boxes to recycle over-issue publications. C-k. Develop an educational program focused on fast-food packaging alternatives. C-l. Develop procurement policies that require
minimal packaging, and reusable and returnable packaging. C-m. Develop green purchasing criteria and distribute
it to businesses and institutions. |
|||
long-term | |||
D. City government is a model of resource efficiency and it lobbies, coordinates, and leads others to achieve sustainability. | |||
5-year | |||
D-1. City government purchases only paper products
with an average of 50% post-consumer recycled content. D-2. City government diverts 60% of its current waste generation. D-3. City government has increased the promotion of the City’s accomplishments to the community. D-4. All City departments participate in a recycling program. |
|||
actions | |||
D-a. Pass a resolution that calls on the City to be a model of waste reduction and recycling. D-b. Develop specifications for products that contain
at least 50% post-consumer recycled content. D-c. Create financial incentives for departments that recycle and reduce waste, including a system whereby disposal cost savings are passed through to individual departments. D-d. Develop a tracking system for city departments to document and quantify waste reduction. D-e. Increase internal and external publicity and promotion of San Francisco’s accomplishments in the areas of recycling, waste reduction, and recycled-product purchasing through a multi-media educational campaign. D-f. Systematically incorporate attentiveness to recycling, waste reduction, and purchase of recycled or reused products into job descriptions and performance evaluations. D-g. Organize meetings of department leaders to promote sharing of information about department accomplishments. |
|||
top | |||
long-term | |||
E. Litter and illegal dumping have been eliminated in San Francisco. | |||
5-year | |||
E-1. The volume of litter generated and materials illegally dumped in San Francisco has been reduced by 50%. | |||
actions | |||
E-a. Increase the enforcement of litter and illegal dumping laws. E-b. Increase the penalties for illegal dumping, particularly of hazardous materials. E-c. Increase the number and visibility of public trash receptacles, and increase collection frequency. E-d. Require litter clean-up programs for public institutions and properties. E-e. Continue school-sponsored neighborhood clean-up events. E-f. Create a hot-line for reports of illegal dumping. E-g. Create a reward program for those reporting illegal dumping (where the dumping is ultimately prosecuted). E-h. Expand Clean San Francisco campaigns into several languages. E-i. Expand promotions of the existing “free neighborhood cleanup” program. E-j. Reduce litter and other negative environmental impacts from trucks transporting materials to and from the City’s transfer station and other large material processing facilities; consider less-polluting alternatives to diesel recycling and refuse-hauling trucks. |
long-term | |||
F. San Francisco maintains a diverse and competitive reuse, repair, and recycling infrastructure (That is, more materials are reprocessed and more methods are used to collect them and restore them to a useful condition). | |||
5-year | |||
F-1. The diversity of options for recovering materials has increased and systems have been created that make it easier to recycle. | |||
actions | |||
F-1-a. Expand the variety of materials accepted for curbside recycling. F-1-b. Ensure access by all neighborhoods to full-service recycling and reuse centers. F-1-c. Allow small businesses to participate in the residential curbside recycling collection program. F-1-d. Increase the availability of recycling in apartment buildings. F-1-e. Increase salvage operations at the City’s transfer station, including salvage of materials collected by the neighborhood cleanup program. F-1-f. Provide incentives and/or subsidies for collection and processing of low-value recyclable and/or reusable materials when viable markets for these materials exist. F-1-g. Promote and/or expand local and statewide waste exchanges. F-1-h. Install beverage-container recycling receptacles on or next to every public trash bin (if an appropriate design can be identified). |
|||
5-year | |||
F-2. The legal and regulatory environment promotes maximum source reduction and recovery of materials. | |||
actions | |||
F-2-a. Utilize progressive enforcement measures (education, warnings, citations) to ensure that recyclable materials are not placed in the garbage. Enforce compliance with city requirements regarding waste reduction and recycling. F-2-b. Create refuse collection and disposal rate structures and recycling fee structures that encourage waste reduction, recycling, composting and reuse. F-2-c. Provide the City’s Refuse Rate Board with the authority to regulate commercial refuse collection rates (since there is a de facto exclusive commercial refuse collection franchise). F-2-d. Consider increasing the cost to dispose of garbage, potentially through:
(Consider and/or mitigate the impacts of any disposal rate increases on recycling and reuse businesses.) F-2-e. Consider incentives for permitted refuse haulers to reduce the tonnage of material landfilled, including linking profit margins to reductions in tonnage of material landfilled. F-2-f. Require businesses and institutions that generate a substantial weekly volume of waste to perform a solid waste audit, consistent with ISO 14000 standards. Make renewal of business licenses contingent on performance of such an audit and development of a plan to reduce waste. (ISO 14000 standards are voluntary international standards devised by the International Standards Organization [Geneva, Switzerland] that establish environmental management system methodologies and review process.) F-2-g. Consider removing legal impediments in local regulations that restrict competition among commercial recycling service providers. F-2-h. Encourage standardized permitting and land application regulations for organic materials, including treated sewage sludge, at the state level. F-2-i. Consider requirements for retail outlets to accept packaging materials from consumers for recycling. F-2-j. Lobby to include reusable containers in California’s beverage-container deposit law. F-2-k. Mandate collection of recyclables as well as garbage if economic incentives and education programs fail to achieve diversion goals. |
|||
5-year | |||
F-3. The number, use, and awareness of repair facilities has increased. | |||
actions | |||
F-3-a. Provide funding and technical support to reuse
and repair businesses. F-3-b. Develop more jobs-skills training opportunities in repair businesses, especially for disadvantaged individuals, perhaps through high school or community college trade programs. F-3-c. Invest in development of new recycling/reuse technology (market development). |
|||
5-year | |||
F-4. The recovery of organic materials has increased. | |||
actions | |||
F-4-a. Develop commercial-sector food-waste recovery programs. F-4-b. Expand promotions of edible food recovery and redistribution programs. F-4-c. Develop a residential yard-waste collection program. F-4-d. Educate and provide financial incentives for landscaping contractors and other generators to recover organic material. F-4-e. Pursue direct land application and/or co-composting of treated sewage sludge for use in soil recovery projects and other agricultural uses. F-4-f. Support development of a statewide organics market. |
|||
top | |||
long-term | |||
G. The San Francisco economy employs sustainable uses of paper and other materials. | |||
5-year | |||
G-1. Paper purchases have decreased and the portion of those purchases that contain recycled material has increased. | |||
actions | |||
G-1-a. Develop a demonstration project highlighting ways to achieve a paper-efficient office. G-1-b. Educate businesses about the availability, costs, and benefits of using recycled and alternative-fiber paper. G-1-c. Increase the City’s minimum-content requirements for recycled paper and institute options for alternative-fiber paper purchasing and use. G-1-d. Require City contractors to use recycled-content paper and other recycled products in work provided to the City. G-1-e. Create incentives for retailers to aggressively market recycled-content products. G-1-f. Continue recycled-products vendor fairs. G-1-g. Consider lobbying for increased postal rates for bulk mail to decrease junk mail; consider lobbying to give residents and businesses the option of blocking receipt of certain types of third-class mail. G-1-h. Consider restrictions on hand-delivered advertising left on residential and commercial doorsteps. |
|||
5-year | |||
G-2. An infrastructure that preserves the highest value of recovered paper and other materials has been created. | |||
actions | |||
G-2-a. Promote the value of source separation to generators
of waste-paper and other discards. G-2-b. Include non-profit organizations (such as sheltered workshops) in material-processing programs to upgrade recycled materials to their highest and best use. |
|||
top | |||
long-term | |||
H. Only resource-efficient building practices are used in San Francisco (including for construction, demolition, and rehabilitation). | |||
5-year | |||
H-1. The salvage and reuse of construction and demolition materials has increased. | |||