I received a note from a reader about my last column on carbon cycle, climate change and super bugs. He reminded me that “fire” is in many ways analogous to the devastation caused by the pine bark beetle.  He’s right!  Drought and the warming climate have made our forests in the West tinder boxes that are susceptible to destruction by fire.  Alaska alone has lost hundreds of thousands of acres to fire this spring and summer. Historically, we’ve always had a fire season.  But now we’re so out of cycle that fire goes way beyond “a season.”  It is wanton and has no bounds in terms of devastation.  With winds and no rain, the destruction is beyond comprehension. These two – super bugs and fire – should send the message that our resources are not infinite. We must change our habits. Unfortunately, I’m afraid we’re not listening!  (Thanks for the note, Bob.)

But now let’s go from super bugs and fire to something that is affecting our efforts to be sustainable.  It’s called the Green Fence which refers to an inspection procedure that China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) has developed for all recyclables that enter their country. In early 2013 China began implementing their Green Fence program. It was aimed at increasing inspections of recovered paper imports, waste paper grades like “mixed papers,” old corrugated (OCC), and old newspapers (ONP). When Green Fence started, dozens and dozens of containers shipped from the United States were rejected. The suppliers not only had to deal with the rejection but also had to cover the cost of freight. Green Fence protocol cost US shippers dearly.  Some, Waste Management (the largest recycler in the world) for example, tried to improve their quality. As I’ll explain, this isn’t easy and the cost of improvement became almost prohibitive. In fact, many waste paper suppliers have decided that the economics of sorting and baling are so cost-negative that it would be better to landfill than to recycle.

This is not a simple situation. Now, since 2013, paper imports have to be approved by MEP.  Shippers of mixed, OCC and ONP, and some high value grades of waste paper, seeking MEP approval must identify their recycling facilities here in America. They must allow audits that check for compliance with Green Fence quality requirements and environmental protection measures.  These same processing facilities also have to report their waste emissions to MEP. MEP has now reclassified all recovered paper as “restricted” and includes the above grades.  To give you an idea of the magnitude of the problem, China imported 29 million metric tons of waste paper in 2013.  This included 16.5 million of OCC, 6.5 million of ONP, and 5.3 million of mixed paper (29 million tons equals 1,450,000 forty foot containers).  That’s a lot of recycled fiber.

The numbers are staggering. How in the world did we get into this situation? Ironically, it happened because all of us want to be more sustainable and recycle. Back in the late 1990s, waste companies, Republic and Waste Management, saw recycling as an opportunity.  They also understood the growth of the domestic paper and packaging industry in China and that those manufacturers would need raw material. Supply and demand, right? The big haulers encouraged communities to develop collection programs for recyclables. The easiest collection method was to put “everything recyclable” in one bin and take it to a sorting facility.  Hence, the birth of the MRF (Municipal Recycling Facility).

MRF’s are huge with conveyors and balers all over the building.  An average MRF will process nothing less than 250–500 tons per day, some actually handling double that volume. Mixed recyclables are conveyed, shaken, strained and sorted manually as fast as possible. MRFs handle paper, glass, plastic and metal. The objective is to produce as clean a segregated product as possible. Initially, in the early 2000s, as volume increased, China accepted imperfect product. As time went on and quality became questionable, government and industry in China had enough and created inspection programs.  Two years ago, Green Fence was born.

Here’s the problem:  mixing materials together, at our homes, creates contamination. It is virtually impossible to sort out all the glass and plastic at the MRF operation. The truth is our recycling materials are filthy and our friends in China have had enough: clean it up or don’t send it.

Frankly, recycling bins here in America have stuff that doesn’t belong. “Single stream recycling” has created a problem: contamination.  Instead of following Germany’s 7 bin recycling collection system, we put everything into one bin and expect the MRF to separate . . . which, even with today’s technology, is impossible. The dilemma we have is interesting. On the one hand, we want to send a positive message to the public (look, we’re recycling 60% in America!) but on the other hand, we’re doing it all wrong. Recycling coordinators have a tough nut to crack. Some individuals would be angry if they were told what to discard, while others who have been told to put everything in their recycling bin don’t understand that everything is not everything. Are you with me?

At Waste Expo (yup, just like Labelexpo, except waste instead of labels) in Las Vegas this past June a heavy hitter panel commented on the issues of single bin – or single stream – recycling.  David Steiner, CEO of Waste Management, said, “Single stream recycling is broken.”  The other CEOs on the panel agreed. They collectively stated that a fundamental issue in the industry is that recycling facilities are really manufacturing plants, and unless output is sold for more than the cost of input, it’s impossible to make a profit. Joseph Quarin, president and CEO of Progressive Waste, said, “We can’t make profits based on quality requirements, processing costs, and material selling prices.” And the discussion went on.

At home, where I live, I have argued with our community to have multiple bins for multiple materials. While the German recycling scheme is the ultimate, I believe 3–4 bins are adequate. In fact, we have three at home and each week we separate plastic, glass and paper. It drives the city collector crazy. He shows such glee dumping my three into his comingled collection vehicle. I’ve tried to explain the importance of separate commodity recycling but he thinks I’m nuts.  He’s quite a large person, so while I continue the “Calvin” way, I don’t dare argue with his way.

So it does begin at home, or where the recyclables are generated.  If you are part of a single stream system, it goes from your house, to a transfer collection point, to an MRF, and in many cases onward to China for consumption.  If your material is contaminated, MEPs Green Fence will ship it back. As Paula Felps (www.911.com) said, “With operation Green Fence, China has announced that it will be stricter in terms of what contaminates it allows in shipments.  That means any shipment of recyclables that’s found to have even a single contaminate, such as a syringe or a stowaway rodent, could be turned away.”

Until we develop the technology for sorting automatically, and creating clean material, single stream recycling does not make sense. It does not allow the processor to value-add. On the basis of contaminated recyclables, which will ultimately cost us all money, recycling doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. Might as well make non-recyclable pressure sensitive roll labelstock.

Another Letter from the Earth.



Calvin Frost is chairman of Channeled Resources Group, headquartered in Chicago, the parent company of Maratech International and GMC Coating. His email address is [email protected].