Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 9063.
CLIFTON — It's time for businesses to take out the trash. At least that's the hope behind a new measure the City OK'd last month.
Adopted in August, a new resolution supporting Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) aims to place some of the burden of product collection, disposal and recycling on companies as opposed to just on Clifton taxpayers.
Clifton residents pay about $5 million each year for the collection and disposal of discarded manufactured goods, City officials say.
City recycling coordinator Al DuBois said Clifton is the first municipality in New Jersey to adopt such a resolution.
The resolution encourages businesses to do what's right, DuBois said. He gave several examples of how companies can decrease the waste going into landfills and decrease the need for recycling.
One example he gave involves egg cartons.
"Why do we need to put eggs in Styrofoam containers?" asked DuBois. He suggested businesses use only cardboard containers which are easily recycled or burned in incinerators and are just as strong.
DuBois said if companies need to take back the waste from their products, they will see how much better it is for consumers and the environment to create more environmentally-safe packaging. He said egg companies, if they had to, would rather get rid of cardboard products instead of ones made of polystyrene foam or plastic.
Another example deals with dry cat food that is packaged in plastic containers.
Why not sell the product in loose bulk where customers can re-use the plastic containers by refilling them rather than throwing it away and buying another. This approach, DuBois said, would create a savings for the company, the consumer and the municipalities that would have less trash to collect.
"This could be great. Consumers and municipalities will save and companies can save too if they take back packaging and reuse it," DuBois said, adding he is not looking to put more expense and "pressure on the backs of businesses."
According to Environmental Protection Agency data these manufactured items and packaging comprise approximately 75 percent of the materials generated by American communities.
The State branch of the EPA has a goal of recycling 60 percent of the solid waste produced by New Jersey municipalities.
"Local governments have no input into the design or marketing of products, make no profit from the products and do not have the resources to adequately address the rising volume," the resolution, adopted on Aug. 17, reads.
Environmental experts say producers have an incentive to design more durable and less toxic products when they are charged with reusing or recycling responsibly.
Product Policy Institute's executive director Bill Sheehan said the manpower required for recycling, de-manufacturing and disassembly of business-made goods could create many jobs during a tough economic time.
"EPR is a big issue because a lot more jobs can be had if we take our waste and put it back into products instead of just landfilling it," Sheehan said. "It will also save money for municipalities because they're spending a lot of money on recycling, waste management even litter."
Sheehan cited an America the Beautiful national study which reported local governments spent $1.2 billion on litter in 2009.
"There are a lot of expenses for local governments," he said. "What EPR does is make it part of the market system which is different from making the taxpayers pay."
City officials said the municipality is gaining hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue due to waste and recycling programs initiated in Clifton.
Mayor Jim Anzaldi said the adoption of the EPR resolution is "a step in the right direction" but it does not constitute a law.
"We're not out there to hurt businesses or make them spend additional money," Anzaldi said. "We're trying to suggest ways to better reduce the burden of waste disposal which has become an enormous expense for municipalities."
There is no penalty for businesses which do not comply with the EPR resolution.
"The importance of these local governments' resolutions is that is mobilizes local government to work towards state legislation," Sheehan said.
Though some Clifton business-owners may disapprove by viewing EPR as an additional cost for their companies, Sheehan said many proprietors he's spoken with view the idea as a positive.
According to PPI data, businesses which are financially culpable for managing their discarded products find ways to reduce waste, operating costs and positively impact their bottom line.
"EPR is a way of earning consumer loyalty," Sheehan said. "We haven't found any businesses in Europe or Canada which lost money because of the policy."
Originally adopted by San Francisco in 2006, Sheehan said EPR has just recently become a hot issue in northeastern states like New York, Massachusetts and Maine. He said 128 cities in six states have adopted the measure.
City officials say the municipality will send letters to the State legislature and State waste associations to support EPR legislation.
E-mail: gicas@northjersey.com
CLIFTON — It's time for businesses to take out the trash. At least that's the hope behind a new measure the City OK'd last month.
Adopted in August, a new resolution supporting Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) aims to place some of the burden of product collection, disposal and recycling on companies as opposed to just on Clifton taxpayers.
Clifton residents pay about $5 million each year for the collection and disposal of discarded manufactured goods, City officials say.
City recycling coordinator Al DuBois said Clifton is the first municipality in New Jersey to adopt such a resolution.
The resolution encourages businesses to do what's right, DuBois said. He gave several examples of how companies can decrease the waste going into landfills and decrease the need for recycling.
One example he gave involves egg cartons.
"Why do we need to put eggs in Styrofoam containers?" asked DuBois. He suggested businesses use only cardboard containers which are easily recycled or burned in incinerators and are just as strong.
DuBois said if companies need to take back the waste from their products, they will see how much better it is for consumers and the environment to create more environmentally-safe packaging. He said egg companies, if they had to, would rather get rid of cardboard products instead of ones made of polystyrene foam or plastic.
Another example deals with dry cat food that is packaged in plastic containers.
Why not sell the product in loose bulk where customers can re-use the plastic containers by refilling them rather than throwing it away and buying another. This approach, DuBois said, would create a savings for the company, the consumer and the municipalities that would have less trash to collect.
"This could be great. Consumers and municipalities will save and companies can save too if they take back packaging and reuse it," DuBois said, adding he is not looking to put more expense and "pressure on the backs of businesses."
According to Environmental Protection Agency data these manufactured items and packaging comprise approximately 75 percent of the materials generated by American communities.
The State branch of the EPA has a goal of recycling 60 percent of the solid waste produced by New Jersey municipalities.
"Local governments have no input into the design or marketing of products, make no profit from the products and do not have the resources to adequately address the rising volume," the resolution, adopted on Aug. 17, reads.
Environmental experts say producers have an incentive to design more durable and less toxic products when they are charged with reusing or recycling responsibly.
Product Policy Institute's executive director Bill Sheehan said the manpower required for recycling, de-manufacturing and disassembly of business-made goods could create many jobs during a tough economic time.
"EPR is a big issue because a lot more jobs can be had if we take our waste and put it back into products instead of just landfilling it," Sheehan said. "It will also save money for municipalities because they're spending a lot of money on recycling, waste management even litter."
Sheehan cited an America the Beautiful national study which reported local governments spent $1.2 billion on litter in 2009.
"There are a lot of expenses for local governments," he said. "What EPR does is make it part of the market system which is different from making the taxpayers pay."
City officials said the municipality is gaining hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue due to waste and recycling programs initiated in Clifton.
