Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Recycling topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Solid Waste Authority presents county recycling, discusses contamination and markets as Tequesta weighs single‑stream switch
Summary
Katie Sprigg of the Solid Waste Authority described Palm Beach County's integrated solid waste system, including two waste‑to‑energy facilities and a recovered materials processing facility, cited recycling rates of 80% (2022), 84% (2023) and 90% (2024), and explained why SWA retains dual‑stream collection; Tequesta EAC asked for benchmarking on single‑stream participation and contamination.
Katie Sprigg, education and outreach supervisor at the Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority (SWA), gave the Environmental Advisory Committee a detailed overview of county solid waste operations and markets and answered members’ questions about recycling systems, composting and hazardous drop‑offs.
Sprigg said the county manages an integrated system including two renewable‑energy (waste‑to‑energy) facilities, a recovered materials processing facility (dual‑stream), a biosolids pelletizer operated under contract by Synagro, a landfill and six transfer stations. She described dual‑stream curbside recycling (separate blue and yellow bins) as a key reason Palm Beach County has reported recycling rates of roughly 80% in 2022, 84% in 2023 and 90% in 2024, and said dual‑stream collection reduces contamination to about 10–12% compared with typical single‑stream contamination figures of 30–40% in other systems.
"We make enough electricity to power all of our facilities off of North Jog, and we sell the extra to Florida Power and Light, and can power around 90,000 homes each year," Sprigg said, describing the county’s waste‑to‑energy outputs. She also explained sorting technology (magnets, eddy currents, optical sorters and robotic arms) and noted that market contracts for paper, aluminum and plastics are managed via periodic bids; some recovered materials are sold domestically and internationally via brokers.
Committee members raised the core policy question facing the village: would switching to single‑stream recycling increase household participation enough to outweigh higher contamination and lower commodity prices? Members asked for comparative data from Martin County and for DEP benchmarking reports; Sprigg said she does not expect Palm Beach County to move to single‑stream and that dual‑stream has produced cleaner commodities for buyers.
Other points Sprigg covered: the county’s home chemical and recycling center drop‑offs (Donald Ross identified as the closest center to Tequesta), limits on composting capacity at the county level, the role of contractors for biosolids marketing, and the county’s landfill management and closure planning (Sprigg cited a notional 2057 horizon for current landfill capacity, subject to change with population and storms).
Next steps: EAC members agreed to research Martin County’s single‑stream experience, consult DEP county reports and follow up with Waste Management and SWA for cost and participation data before deciding whether to recommend any change in collection method. No formal recommendation was made at the meeting.
