Starbucks and Packaging Recycling
Starbucks wants its cups to be 100% recyclable by 2012. That’s a great goal for a company that uses three billion cups annually.
So Starbucks has begun to gathered stakeholders from every step in their supply chain and beyond to discuss the matter. Cup Summit included suppliers, paperboard companies, municipalities, recyclers, waste haulers, manufacturers, and environmental NGOs.
While cross-channel discussions were reportedly a big eye opener, many are skeptical, which is typical of any ambitious undertaking.
Sourcing 100% recycled paperboard is relatively easy. The key issue is related to the recycling the used cups.
Regulations are the first obstacle. Starbucks must be able to get their cups as old corrugated cardboard (OCC) so they can be recycled in the first place. That’s the basic regulatory hurdle.
Then the next obstacle is that the cups must be recyclable at the local level. The communities must first recycle, and not all do. Understand that recycling has always been a numbers game. That is, is there enough of the used material to sell it in bulk to someone who will use the material as a raw material. So even if there is a market for a material, there may not be a market near enough to make the transaction economically viable. In simple terms, low volume of a material and transportation costs (both economic and for sustainablity-minded companies, carbon footprint) may be deal breakers.
Recycling old corrugated cardboard is widespread, so getting the cups to qualify is important. But keep in mind they are contaminated by the contents. For example, you can’t recycle pizza boxes because of the grease and cheese residue. On disposal, Starbucks’ cups held or still hold, coffee, tea, milk, sugar and other toppings which could preclude recycling.
This segues to the real elephant in the room (pardon my mixing of metaphors throughout), Starbucks’ customers. Most cups leave by the front door or the drive through and how do you control them? Influencing guest actions has been a real bugbear for amusement parks and hotels because even if these organizations provide recycling containers, they aren’t often used properly and often the recyclable material is tossed in the trash receptacle anyway.
So it’s very tough for organizations whose guests operate within their boundaries, but like I said, most Starbucks cups leave the premises and end up far from Starbucks’ control.
From where I sit, the initiative deserves credit. It’s ambitious, it’s worthwhile and to succeed it must be a game changer. Like Gazelle, this is one project I’ll be following going forward.
What do you think? Is the project feasible? What would have to change? Let me know!
More on Franchised Waste Markets
David Davis, principal of MSW Consultants sent me an email about my previous Franchised Waste Market post. He also emailed me a white paper he wrote for the city of Monrovia, CA.
Graciously, David agreed to let me post an excerpt. Let me know what you think about his take!
Lower Rates than those in Cities with a Single Exclusive Hauler Rates for commercial refuse collection service in cities with non-exclusive systems are
typically lower than those in cities in which a single hauler provides exclusive service to both the residential and commercial sectors. This is mainly due to two factors: market pressure and ‘subsidization.’
First, in non-exclusive systems, there is continued downward competitive market pressure on rates. If a hauler increases its rates too much, the customer is usually able to readily switch to another service provider.6 As a result, the freemarket keeps rates in check.
However, commercial rates in cities that have a single hauler with a city-wide exclusive contract typically suffer from a phenomenon known as ‘subsidization.’ In these cities, the commercial rates often subsidize the residential rates.
This phenomenon typically occurs over time when a single hauler provides exclusive service to both the residential and commercial sectors, typically under a single contract. From the hauler’s profit-seeking perspective, it usually views the city as a whole. The hauler is typically indifferent as to how much of its profit comes from the residential or commercial sector, as long as the whole contract is profitable. Consequently, as rates are adjusted and the
contract re-negotiated over time, there is a tendency for the commercial rates to be increased more than the residential rates.
This tendency is caused by two factors. First, residential rates usually consist of one or two simple monthly charges that are charged to a large number of single family customers. These high-profile rates are easily understood and often compared to similar rates in nearby jurisdictions. However, commercial rates are more abstract, and are based on a more complicated matrix of the size and number of bins, and number of weekly pickups.
Consequently, residential rates are often subject to more scrutiny when they are adjusted or re-negotiated.
The second factor is the political nature of local government. There are simply more voters in the residential sector. Elected officials tend to represent the needs of their constituents, and more of their constituents are residential ratepayers. As a result, commercial rates tend to increase more over time than residential rates. Those commercial rates tend to be higher than the rates charged in non-exclusive systems, which are kept in check by market pressure.
Whatever happened to the Tire Shark for Tire Recycling?
Back in 2006, Oakleaf my esteemed competitor, came out with a cool product called the Tire Shark. It compacted tires and then nailed them so they’d stay squished. Saved a lot of space – as you know air in a dumpster or roll off costs you money and makes your waste disposal company money.
Tire Shark
Anyway, I can’t find any mention of Tire Shark on the Oakleaf web site, except for a product launch press release. I found an expired domain name, “thetireshark.com,” but so sign of the beast.
Can anyone tell me, is it still around?
All I can find are these tire sharks:
Tire Shark for Tots
The Art Crowd's Tire Shark
Sell Your Gadgets On Gazelle
Now that consumers are swarming the malls, it may not surprise you learn the average US consumer spends $1,500 every year on electronic gadgets. So we Americans are churning and burning through our electronics really fast. That’s where Gazelle comes in.
Gazelle enables recycling through a neat business model that’s akin to Netflix, another favorite of mine. View how Gazelle works here, but suffice it to say you notify Gazelle of the items you want to dispose of, they make you an offer and, if accepted, send you the box. When you send it back, you get paid!
Not a bad way to close the end of life loop for consumer electronics!
What’s more, businesses, non-profits and schools can sell to Gazelle in bulk too!
I hope Gazelle pans out. It’s a novel idea and a needed one. I am going to try it out soon and I’ll post my experience when I do. Why not try Gazelle yourself and let me know how it goes?
