The last 10 years have been tough for curbside recycling, with significant drops in collection rates even as companies invest more money in its success. Yet imminent changes to policy — along with better data and more honest conversations with customers — could help turn that trend around, said speakers at the Plastics Recycling Conference, held March 24-26 in National Harbor, Maryland.
Curbside recycling plays a notable role in supplying manufacturers with feedstock to meet rising recycled content goals. Yet curbside collection volumes are down by an estimated 50% over the last 10 years, said Myles Cohen, founder of Circular Ventures, a packaging and recycling advisory firm. Well-known factors such as rising collection and processing costs, coupled with public distrust of recycling, have taken a toll, he said.
In 2016, about 20.3 million tons of material was collected from curbside sources, but that number dipped to about 15.4 million tons in 2020 and about 10.1 million tons in 2024, Cohen said, citing reports from Moore & Associates, the Consumer Brands Association and The Recycling Partnership.
During a panel on curbside collection challenges, Keefe Harrison, CEO of The Recycling Partnership, said the data over that decade isn’t an “apples-to-apples comparison” because those reports measured a range of curbside and multifamily data points. Yet data collected in recent years is becoming more detailed and sophisticated, and it confirms curbside collection is flagging, she said.
Transparency with customers and the public is critical
Numerous cities in recent years announced they would halt their curbside recycling programs due to rising costs. The industry is working to reverse that trend by collaborating with municipalities on cost-saving measures and education campaigns, shifting to pay-as-you-throw models or investing in sorting technology to extract more value from recyclables. Some municipalities have agreed to restart programs due, in part, to public pressure from residents that want these services, said Brent Bell, vice president of recycling at WM.
However, the transition back into offering curbside recycling sometimes feeds into consumer skepticism or confusion, he said. “It’s hard to come back to a community and say, ‘Hey, I know for two years you were using this recycling bin as a trash can, but now we're actually going to recycle again.’”
Speakers throughout the conference noted that the public’s negative perception of recycling as “broken” or a “scam” has adversely impacted recycling participation and the ability for recyclers to get the right kinds of materials from curbside streams. Yet speakers also stressed that the recycling industry needs to be honest with customers about the challenges it faces — specifically with plastics recycling.
Owning up to hurdles such as higher costs, higher contamination levels and lower commodity prices can help customers understand a fuller picture of the recycling process, while also shedding light on just how valuable recycled plastics are, Bell said.
“We can all be more transparent about the storytelling. Where does this material go, where does it end up?” he said.
During a panel discussion about polypropylene collection, Jeff Snyder, senior vice president of recycling at Rumpke Waste & Recycling, said the company actively asks residents in certain regions to put disposable drink cups and food tubs in curbside bins. These are items that residents throw into the bin whether their local hauler can recycle them or not, but Rumpke’s choice to actively request them comes with a high level of responsibility, he said.
“We need to build trust that when they put something in the recycling bin, it’s being recycled into something new,” he said. “If I say I want cups and tubs, I better have an end market for that.”
Nationwide policy and local action both improve curbside collection
Numerous speakers noted that the ongoing implementation process for extended producer responsibility programs could serve as a key driver in helping to remedy some of curbside recycling’s biggest woes, such as costs to municipalities and reduced collection volumes.
Policies like EPR have the benefit of influencing larger recycling systems instead of tackling each of the country’s 9,000 recycling programs individually, Harrison said.
EPR programs often require states to undergo a recycling needs assessment, which can result in powerful data collection to improve curbside and other recycling systems, said Neil Menezes, vice president of material services at the Circular Action Alliance.
But stakeholders need to commit to providing that data for the greater good, he emphasized. “There’s a level of distrust across stakeholders” who shy away from providing too many details, he said. “Through EPR, we’re trying to get trust built up to better understand where the needs are. If you don't understand that, it’s hard to improve the system.”
Continued data collection is critical to gaining insight into curbside systems, even when that data points to more problems, Harrison said. “It's important to be really honest with our data, really honest with the challenge, because if we're not, we will never fix the supply challenge.”
Yet speakers also cautioned that EPR isn’t a cure-all. “EPR has a lot of promise to collect a lot of tons, but it’s all about how it will be implemented,” cautioned Kate Bailey, chief policy officer of the Association of Plastic Recyclers, during a panel on recycling legislation.
And since EPR programs are typically designed for statewide systems, it’s still critical to continue to invest in local initiatives, such as MRF improvements, grants for new carts or education programs tailored to specific communities, Harrison added.
At the end of the day, “We can’t just stop curbside collection. We all need this feedstock for our businesses, for our products.” she said.
