Bill Overview
Title: Recycling and Composting Accountability Act
Description: This bill establishes data collection and reporting requirements concerning recycling and composting programs. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency must report on the capability of the United States to implement a national composting strategy for compostable materials in order to reduce contamination rates for recycling.
Sponsors: Sen. Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE]
Target Audience
Population: People worldwide involved in waste generation and management
Estimated Size: 330000000
- Recycling and composting initiatives impact everyone who generates waste, from individuals in households to businesses and industries.
- In particular, individuals who are responsible for household waste management will be directly impacted by any changes or improvements in recycling and composting programs.
- People living in areas where recycling and composting facilities are introduced or expanded will be particularly affected.
- Improved national recycling and composting programs can lead to reduced waste in landfills, impacting environmental outcomes and potentially affecting everyone globally.
- Certain segments of the population, like environmentalists, waste management professionals, and industries involved in the production and handling of recyclable materials, will be more directly involved and impacted.
Reasoning
- Recycling and composting initiatives impact everyone who generates waste, from private households to larger organizations and industries.
- Those directly handling waste, such as individuals responsible for household waste management, will be notably influenced if recycling and compost programs change.
- Residents in areas where new recycling and composting infrastructures are introduced or expanded are likely to be especially affected.
- Improved national recycling and composting programs can reduce landfill waste, influencing environmental outcomes and potentially affecting the global population.
- People who are particularly environmentally-conscious, as well as professionals involved in waste management and industries dealing with recyclable materials, might see more direct impacts.
Simulated Interviews
Environmental Consultant (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm supportive of any policy that advances recycling and composting efforts.
- San Francisco already has a mature composting system, so this policy may have less impact here.
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 |
Waste Management Supervisor (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could significantly improve our facilities' capabilities.
- I'm hopeful it will lead to better recycling habits among the populace.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Stay-at-home Parent (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Compulsory recycling and compost programs would make it easier for busy families like mine.
- I'm looking forward to fewer landfill trips.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired Engineer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could significantly contribute to reducing my city's environmental footprint.
- I'd like to see more community composting opportunities.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Student (New York, NY)
Age: 25 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Better composting guidelines could help someone like me learn what's compostable.
- I'm more focused on convenience.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
High School Teacher (Portland, OR)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy will provide valuable data for my lessons on sustainability.
- I'm optimistic about long-term impacts on student awareness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Small Business Owner (Cafe) (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If composting is incentivized, it could save us money on waste disposal.
- Customers appreciate environmental efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
City Planner (Austin, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy may provide valuable data for city planning and environmental measures.
- It aligns with sustainable urban development goals.
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 | 9 | 8 |
Tech Specialist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving office waste management through composting can make a big difference.
- However, I'm skeptical about policy implementation impacts.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Farm Operator (Rural Vermont)
Age: 60 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I support national efforts, local solutions work best for my community.
- I'd like to see more integration between local and national policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 2: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 3: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 5: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The scope and scale of data collection and the number of stakeholders involved significantly influence the cost.
- The ability to efficiently integrate federal, state, and local data systems will affect both the cost and effectiveness of the program.
- Potential pushback or organizational resistance from local governments or industries used to different systems could slow implementation.