Bill Overview
Title: Recycling Infrastructure and Accessibility Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish a pilot grant program for improving recycling accessibility in communities. The EPA may award grants to states, local governments, Indian tribes, or public-private partnerships.
Sponsors: Rep. McKinley, David B. [R-WV-1]
Target Audience
Population: People in communities worldwide who participate or could potentially participate in recycling programs
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The bill focuses on communities, which implies populations who are part of urban, suburban, or rural settings will be impacted.
- Recycling affects nearly everyone in a community because waste management is a universal necessity.
- By improving accessibility, the target is seemingly to increase participation, which suggests both current and potential future recyclers within a community are within the target population.
- States, local governments, and tribes will implement this act, impacting people under their jurisdiction.
- Proper recycling can affect environmental quality, indirectly touching all aspects of human wellbeing, such as health and economic outputs related to cleaner environments.
Reasoning
- The policy is deployed through local authorities, which implies those in local governance and positions in waste management are directly involved.
- Urban and suburban populations are more likely to have immediate and visible impacts due to higher population density and existing infrastructure.
- Rural communities might see longer-term improvements as infrastructure develops over time.
- People already engaged in recycling may experience medium impact while increased infrastructure may draw in previous non-participants to start recycling.
- Environmental consciousness varies among people; some may not change behavior regardless of infrastructure improvements.
- Budgetary constraints suggest prioritization of high-density areas and places with existing initiatives and some rural expansions.
Simulated Interviews
Office Manager (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've always wanted better recycling facilities in my building.
- I think easier access will encourage more residents to recycle.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Truck Driver (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Recycling has not been a big part of my life, but if there's more convenience, I'd consider it.
- I see a lot of waste on my routes and it bothers me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
College Student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think any improvement in recycling is beneficial.
- The policy could provide more bins and services on campus, making it easier.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Environmental Scientist (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will bring much-needed funds to expand our programs.
- I believe our city is ready to take recycling efforts to the next level.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired (Boise, ID)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hoping the policy will address inefficiencies in our current system.
- It's important that even smaller cities get improved access to recycling.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Social Worker (Denver, CO)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could help raise awareness about recycling in communities I work with.
- I'd love to see more educational programs alongside increased accessibility.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retired Engineer (Portland, OR)
Age: 72 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy is necessary to progress our community's recycling capabilities.
- I support technology integration for better waste management.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Small Business Owner (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More accessible recycling would greatly benefit small businesses like mine.
- I struggle to find commercial recycling solutions that don't involve additional costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Teacher (Jacksonville, FL)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this as a teaching opportunity for my students.
- I hope the program includes educational components.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Farmer (Omaha, NE)
Age: 57 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm interested in how this policy could support rural recycling initiatives.
- I think there's potential to address agricultural waste too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $220000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $270000000)
Year 3: $242000000 (Low: $187000000, High: $297000000)
Year 5: $266200000 (Low: $206700000, High: $326700000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The success of the program hinges on effective implementation and monitoring of recycling practices.
- Collaboration between states, tribes, and private partnerships is crucial.
- Potential for wide variability in the effectiveness of programs depending on regional differences.