California reaches recycling goal

By: DAVE DOWNEY - Staff Writer | Friday, August 25, 2006 9:49 PM PDT

Terry Dickson of San Diego removes plant debris from the back of his trailer at the Miramar Landfill Greenery area Friday. Near by, the California Integrated Waste Management Board and San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders, announce that the achievement of a statewide solid waste diversion goal had been met at a small news conference.
JAMIE SCOTT LYTLE Staff Photographer
Order a copy of this photo
Visit our Photo Gallery

SAN DIEGO ---- It took five years longer than it was supposed to, but California is now in compliance with a landmark 1989 law that required half of waste headed for landfills to be recycled or reused, state officials announced Friday in a news conference at San Diego's Miramar Landfill.

"It's great to be here in America's Finest City to make one of our greatest announcements," said Margo Reid Brown, chairwoman of the California Integrated Waste Management Board, the agency charged with enforcing the law.

"Simply put, you did it California," Brown said, under a tent set up between a mountain of tree limbs and piles of tree trunks, plywood and wood pallets. "You have cut your trash in half and have achieved the mandate. And let me tell you, many people didn't believe it could be done."

Lanny Clavecilla, a state waste board spokesman, said by telephone from Sacramento that California recorded a recycling rate of 52 percent for 2005, up from 48 percent the year before. Clavecilla said agency officials are just now making the announcement because the calculation was based on reports filed by cities and counties with the state earlier this month.

Under the nation's toughest recycling law ---- which mandated specific targets be met within specified time frames while other states chose to set goals ---- California was supposed to reach the 50 percent mark by the year 2000, state officials said. There also was an earlier mandate to hit 25 percent by 1995.

Rosalie Mule, a board member with waste management experience in San Diego and Riverside counties, said California would have reached the 50 percent target earlier had it not been for the housing boom, which flooded the state with construction waste, and the proliferation of computers and cell phones.

A law that went into effect earlier this year requires electronic devices such as computers to be recycled because they contain hazardous chemicals.

"The nature of our waste stream has changed dramatically in the last 15 years," Mule said. "We've found markets for so many of these materials that once were considered waste."

Lorraine Van Kekerix, the agency's acting deputy director for diversion, planning and local assistance, said the state does not intend to stop at 50 percent, now that no mandatory targets remain. But doing that, she said, will require coming up with ways to recycle construction debris, which accounts for 20 percent of waste statewide, and discarded food items, which account for 30 percent.

Most cities in North County and Southwest Riverside County were doing well in their own efforts to hit the 50 percent target until the housing boom saddled them with tons of construction debris, Mule said. The state's most recent estimates for recycling rates show the established, mostly built-out communities in compliance or close to it, and the newer, fast-growing cities behind.

According to the state, recycling rates are 56 percent for Del Mar and Poway, 49 percent in Solana Beach, Canyon Lake and Carlsbad, 48 percent in Encinitas, 47 percent in Escondido, 46 percent in Temecula, 39 percent in Oceanside, 37 percent in Vista, 36 percent in San Marcos and Murrieta, and 13 percent in Lake Elsinore. Van Kekerix stressed those were preliminary numbers subject to revision.

Teri Fazzio, recreation-tourism manager for Lake Elsinore, said her city takes issue with the state's estimate. Officials there believe the city's rate is closer to 36 percent.

At the same time, Lake Elsinore readily acknowledges that ballooning construction debris has dragged its recycling rate.

"We were at 50, and then it went down when all of this construction started in the city," Fazzio said.

Over on the coast, Oceanside Councilwoman Shari Mackin said her city knows it has work to do ---- and already is doing it. Mackin said the city launched programs to emphasize to schoolchildren and business owners the need to recycle, and for the first time this summer set out recycling containers on its beaches and at its harbor.

"I hope to see that (39 percent) number change," Mackin said. "We've got to get it up to that 50 percent, and we will do it."

Contact staff writer Dave Downey at (760) 740-5442 or ddowney@nctimes.com.

Next
10 comment(s)[-]Go to Top

Freddy wrote on Aug 25, 2006 10:54 PM:What Mexican farmers are going to be impacted? They are all coming here illegally.!

John wrote on Aug 26, 2006 12:34 AM:That's true.

Hey Freddy: wrote on Aug 26, 2006 2:54 AM:That's a great drooling comment.

Rumblfish wrote on Aug 26, 2006 6:06 AM:Recycling would make a lot more sense if it were made more it convenient. Why aren't condo developments and apartment complexes forced to have community recycle bins? In high density areas, residents do not have room to store recyclables in their homes. Why don't municipal governments insist on having glass, paper, plastics and tin recycling depots in every condo and apartment. City planners should also be designating recyling depots in all future residential neighborhoods. Make the developers who create the construction trash pay for them!

FROWISS wrote on Aug 26, 2006 10:04 AM:With the incredible rise in recycling, construction debris diversion and compaction technologies, we've extended the life of existing landfills by decades. Further, the State approved two mega-landfills in the late 1990's in the desert, Mesquite and Eagle Mountain. Each of these landfills will handle 100 years capacity for all solid waste for all six Southern California counties. So why in Hell are we allowing Gregory Canyon to go forward and clog Highway 76 with more trucks, ruin the San Luis Rey River and aquifers which 200,000 people drink from, and cost the entire region billions in "superfund" type cleanup of the river decades from now when the coupon clipping royalty owners of Gregory Canyon are long gone? We can rail all of our solid waste by Carrizo Gorge Railway in San Diego to Mesquite mega-landfill at Glamis.

Bigger Cans wrote on Aug 26, 2006 10:25 AM:We need bigger cans for our recycleables. Those little yellow & green bins don't cut it ... give me something on wheels ... like the green waste cans!

Espresso wrote on Aug 26, 2006 8:31 PM:You said it Bigger Cans! I've got blue and black bins on wheels and even that isn't enough, we need a green one on wheels for plant materials. Also Rumblefish is right, make the developers pay for recycling centers in the new neighborhoods. Frowiss, your post is informative. It is the first time I've heard of Mesquite and Eagle Mountain landfills.

A voter wrote on Aug 26, 2006 9:52 PM:There is NO excuse for Oceanside to have such poor recycling percentages. What is going on?????? Hire some recycling staff and get this going! Do you want a dump on the San Luis Rey River????

Power of Knowledge wrote on Oct 30, 2006 8:56 AM:Recycling is the single most destructive policy to have ever been implemented by US policy makers. The illusion is that recycling helps the environment. The truth is really the opposite. Recycling is extremely wasteful and destructive. Did anyone stop to think where the energy came from to transport, clean, reprocess and redistribute the recycled matter? Simply put, recycling has exponentially increased our environmental waste. We will run out of breathable air before we run out of materials. For example less than 20% of plastics are recycleable the first time with huge toxic emissions resulting from melting the plastic. Plastic itself has a limited lifetime in contrast to say aluminum. The fact of the matter is that recycling has increased the destruction of our environment and made the mafia richer. The bottomline is we must find a cleaner source of energy other than nuclear and fossil fuels. Only when we find a clean source of energy will recycling truly be environmentally sound. Until that occurs it is government mismanagement as usual.

LeeJen wrote on Nov 15, 2006 10:05 AM:Wonderful comments, all! Excellent point about plastics, though I can say if they are accurate. Do keep in mind that any cost a developer or business owner incures will be passed down to the consumer. Only people pay taxes. However, the extra expense is well worth the benefit. It is time for everyone to reflect on how they personally can (and must) change their lifestyle and habits to lessen their impact on this planet we only borrow for a short time. There is enough for our need, but not enough for our greed.

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.

Submit Comment[-]

(optional)
   

Advertisement

Videos