RECYCLING AND THE ENVIRONMENT BIGGEST BANGS Do Recycling

RECYCLING AND THE ENVIRONMENT - BIGGEST “BANGS”: Do Recycling Programs Perform Better than Energy Efficiency Programs for GHG and Jobs Creation? Lisa A. Skumatz, Ph. D. Skumatz Economic Research Associates, Inc. The Econservation Institute 762 Eldorado Drive, Superior, CO 80027 303/494 -1178 email: skumatz@serainc. com May be used only with permission of Author - ©SERA 2009 Internally funded

US GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (2005) CONVENTIONAL Source: USEPA SERA

GOAL – REDUCE MTCE… o Historic takeaways – n o Prioritized actions in energy efficiency (EE), transportation BUT – if an MTCE is an MTCE*, all reductions are great… …and a CHEAPER one may be even greater…! n n What is the cost hierarchy? And are there other factors to consider? **And an MTCE may not be an MTCE – methane (from solid waste) Has a more intense effect over 20 years – front-loaded. Multiplier May be 23 times worse … or with the time element, 70 times worse. SERA

CONSIDER… Analyze Delivery of GHG Reductions – Energy vs. Diversion…

WASTE PROGRAMS ANALYZED Curbside Recycling (CS Recy) Curbside Yard Waste (CS YW) Pay As You Throw (PAYT) SERA

ENERGY PROGRAMS ANALYZED Residential Weatherization (Res EE) Commercial Lighting (Coml EE) Wind Solar SERA

PROGRAMS MODELED o Solid waste: n n n o o Pay as you throw (PAYT) incentive – 3 effects Residential curbside recycling Residential organics composting collection (yard and food waste) n n n Energy Efficiency: n n Commercial lighting retrofit Residential weatherization Wind Photovoltaics / solar Computation Steps Estimated program costs: o o o per MSW ton diverted (solid waste) per k. Wh for energy programs Used in-house SERA, “NEBIt”© model, and external data Modeled GHG impacts Computed $/MTCO 2 e for each program “Normalized” SERA

RELATIVE COST PER MTCO 2 e FOR SOLID WASTE, ENERGY PROGRAMS 7 x 18 x 3 x 1 x 0. 6 x 0. 3 x 0. 5 x* Results show key MSW programs cheaper to reduce CO 2 than EE. PV, Wind high cost per MTCO 2 e. Source: Skumatz Economic Research Associates, Inc. SERA, Superior, CO All rights reserved, Draft. May be used with permission of author, *Organics figures Vary based on model used SERA

UPSTREAM PRODUCTION SAVINGS LONG-HAUL BREAK-EVEN FIGURES It is not about the landfill savings – embedded energy as driver… Methane also important (front-loaded, high impact) Material Aluminum Prod’n Sav. (MMBTU/ ton coll’n) Break even. Truck Break even. Rail Break even Freighter 177 121, 000 475, 000 538, 000 LDPE 61 41, 000 162, 000 184, 000 PET 59 40, 000 157, 000 178, 000 Steel 19 13, 000 52, 000 59, 000 Newspaper 16 11, 000 43, 000 49, 000 Corrugated 12 9, 000 33, 000 38, 000 Office pap 10 7, 000 27, 000 31, 000 Boxboard 6. 5 4, 400 17, 400 19, 800 Glass (to bottles) 1. 9 1, 300 5, 100 5, 800 Source: Allaway, Oregon DEQ, draft) Break even: transport energy = energy saved displacing virgin feedstock SERA

US GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (REVISED) Source: USEPA (Prelim); from Allaway (ORDEQ) SERA

AUXILIARY IMPACTS AND POLICY ISSUES Or how all k. Wh (or MTCE) may not be created equal…

JOB MULTIPLIERS FOR ENERGY AND RECYCLING PROGRAMS More local & national job impacts in weatherization because labor intensive pgm; Appliance replacement programs more limited impact (appliances not made in US) ENERGY JOBS (per $1 million investment) SOLID WASTE JOBS (per 10, 000 tons) Sources: Energy Job Multipliers - Skumatz Economic Research Associates, Inc. (SERA) Superior, CO All rights reserved. May be used with permission of author; Solid waste job mult from Institute of Local Self Reliance, Washington DC. SERA

MULTIPLIERS – GHG, JOBS, AND $ FOR DIVERSION & EE 18 x Diversion cheaper MTCE than EE or renewables. EE labor intensive per MTCE, but diversion comparable in jobs/$1 M Source: DRAFT figures, Skumatz Economic Research Associates, Inc. (SERA) Superior, CO. All rights reserved. May be used with permission of author. SERA

OTHER PROGRAM / POLICY CONSIDERATIONS Dollars aren’t the whole picture either…

SPEED / COVERAGE / AUTHORITY – COMPARISONS o Speed to implement n o Coverage n o Cities / counties often no authority over energy…. But states have regulatory authority over both… Retention… n o All households vs. slow buildup Authority n o Stroke of a pen… Studied in energy, not solid waste (PAYT exception) Advantage, solid waste on these issues… SERA

RELATIVE COST (PER MTCO 2 E) AND COVERAGE – “RECYCLING” VS ENERGY EFFICIENCY Normalized Multiplier for Cost per MTCO 2 E (SERA) Speed to implement and full scale implementation coverage Commercial Energy Efficiency 1. 0 – baseline 1 -3 years; Residential Energy Efficiency 3 times as expensive as com’l EE 1 -3 years; fraction of customer Wind 7 -8 times as expensive as com’l EE TBD, Phase 2 Photo. Voltaic (PV) 18 -25 times com’l EE TBD, Phase 2 Curbside Recycling 0. 6 -0. 7 times the cost of com’l EE 0. 5 - 2 years; covers all Pay As You Throw (PAYT) 0. 2 -0. 3 times cost of com’l EE 3 -9 months after political Prevention & reuse 0 cost No lag; education Yard Waste program 0. 5 +/- times cost of com’l EE (Phase 2) 1 -2 years, Phase 2 fraction of customer base households (HH) in area approval; covers all single family HH NOTE: Conservative estimates (Source: Skumatz Economic Research Associates SERA 2007 -2008; DRAFT); may be used with permission of author SERA

PROGRAM SELECTION / DELIVERY IMPLICATIONS Integrated planning…

SUPPLY CURVE - PORTFOLIO FOR GHG STRATEGY– YEAR 1… YEAR N Cost $/MTCE Other criteria – risk, reliability, Control, etc for portfolio… Technical potential issue; Also RETENTION a factor…. T 1 Etc… R 3 EE 2 R 1 R 2 EE 1 Local, state, federal… Quantity (tons, kwh MTCE) SERA

AVOIDED GHG SUPPLY CURVE: RAMP UP MORE QUICKLY & CHEAPLY Hypothetical / template program assumptions…Illustrative Purposes Only SERA

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS o Measurable impacts from GHG reductions n o Cost to achieve GHG reductions from strategies n n o Millions in savings and premiums per ton diverted. Some “recycling” cheaper than energy conservation Faster to implement / greater coverage / have authority – early “big bang” programs (phase 2) Broader context… “making the case” for diversion beyond economics… n n n Comparisons on other factors – jobs, stimulus implications Not 3% - Solid waste is faster / cheaper… Near term – Solid waste should be at the table for climate change… policy / programs local, state, federal. SERA

Happy to provide slides – leave business card or send email CONTACT INFORMATION Lisa A. Skumatz, Ph. D. SERA, Inc. 762 Eldorado Drive, Superior, CO 80027 Phone: 303/494 -1178 Email: skumatz@serainc. com Web www. serainc. com Thanks to communities that fill out surveys on www. serainc. com – helps us with these statistical surveys!! SERA