Resolution 30990, the Zero Waste Strategy, which I initiated and which was approved by the council in 2007, includes an array of strategies to prevent or reduce the use of problem products, those that are hard to recycle, are significant elements of the waste stream, or contain toxic materials.

In 2008, the council adopted two pieces of legislation that covered products of concern. The ban on expanded polystyrene ("Styrofoam") food containers took effect on Jan. 1, 2009, and has been implemented with little controversy.

The proposed fee on disposable shopping bags was adopted by the council, but was subsequently petitioned to a voter referendum, where it was defeated, being approved by only 47 percent of the voters, following a $1.4 million campaign against it by the American Chemistry Council.

In 2008, the council also approved a Statement of Legislative Intent on implementation of waste reduction activities, directing Seattle Public Utilities to prepare a five-year plan to "encourage use of low-waste products and packaging and to discourage the use of products and packaging that must be recycled or disposed of as garbage."

The initial report on that plan was received by the council in mid-July.

The report notes that compliance with the "Styrofoam ban" has been excellent, with over 90 percent compliance on a voluntary basis. The next stage will be implementation of a requirement that all disposable food service products used in the city be either compostable or recyclable by July 1, 2010, at which time Seattle will have become the first major American city to achieve such a revolutionary change in waste reduction.

As of the beginning of July, food waste composting has been implemented at 1,320 restaurants and grocery stores.

The next phase of waste reduction will focus on eight problem products, which together comprise approximately 53,000 tons of waste in 2004, about 12 percent of the city’s total waste. The priorities for actions include:

1. Developing a recycling facility and collection mechanism for used carpet (14,000 tons). This product is readily recyclable.

2. Undertaking outreach, technical assistance and collection promotion for plastic film from commercial sources (16,000 tons).

3. Encourage the use of non-toxic alternatives to treated wood waste (13,600 tons). Treated wood waste is a major contaminant for wood waste reuse and recycling, but alternatives are often suitable.

4. Support voluntary and eventually mandatory requirements that industry take back fluorescent lamps and household batteries, and expanded collection options for medical sharps.

5. Ban the use of "Styrofoam" packaging (‘foam peanuts’) in city purchasing and encourage the industry to change to more recyclable alternatives. Because so much of this is in interstate commerce, a ban is not legally feasible. While it is a modest part of the waste stream (1,000 tons), it is highly visible and a major contaminant.

6. Work with public, charities, and industry to encourage reuse of wearable discards and fiber recycling for textiles (7,600 tons).

Disposal bans may be a future option for used carpet and plastic film after the recycling and education programs have had time to mature, but are probably not feasible for the other items.

However, Seattle Public Utilities concludes that implementing this array of strategies could divert more than half of the volume and much of the toxic materials from the landfill over the next few years.

While this implementation proceeds, Public Utilities will also continue to look at other materials, such as single-use beverage containers, paints, telephone books and plastic food packaging, to identify those where Seattle could implement additional waste reduction programs.

In addition, the city will continue to support state and regional efforts to develop producer funded materials recovery programs (product stewardship) for other items such as pharmaceuticals and paints.

The mayor and council will also consider whether any further steps should be taken on disposable grocery bags in the light of the repeal of the proposed bag fee.

The city may chose to let this issue rest and continue work on educational and voluntary efforts, or to consider a ban on plastic bags, the alternative chosen by San Francisco in a similar situation, when its proposed bag fee was blocked by the California legislature.

The Zero Waste Strategy is already having a major impact on Seattle’s waste stream, as the amount of waste collected and disposed of is beginning to decline after many years of growth. Continued success will depend on public support for specific measures, and designing programs that will ensure maximum recovery and reduction while engendering the lowest amount of consumer resistance.

This article appears originally in Richard Conlin's newsletter "Making it Work."