California, America : An Overview of Solid Waste Issues

California is known for its landscapes, both natural and created. The expansive yards and "Sunset" gardens of the state’s urban and suburban communities are nearly as famous as the coastline, oak-dotted rolling hills, and the grand Sierra. But while the natural beauty of the Golden State has been gifted to its fortunate residents by Nature, the created beauty comes at a price.
To develop and maintain the cherished landscapes that frame our homes and buildings requires significant inputs. Water, soil amendments, fertilizer, hard-scaping, and other natural and manufactured resources come together to give us the greenery with which we surround ourselves. And out of these landscapes come the trimmings—grass, leaves, branches, and weeds—that need to be managed. Conventionally this has meant disposal: stuffing yard waste into garbage cans, piling it in the street, or hauling it to the dump. For many reasons this convention needs to change.
California generated over 40 million tons of municipal solid waste in 1990. At over eight pounds per person per day, Californians produce more waste than any other population. Official numbers derived from mandated studies put yard waste at about 15 percent of the total, or close to six million tons each year. Many believe that these numbers may be artificially low because the waste studies were performed during drought years when plant and weed growth was slowed by water restrictions.
Compounding concerns about the burden on California’s disposal systems were studies performed in the late 1980s, which indicated that the state was running out of landfill capacity. While some communities did have access to landfills that would, at current rates of filling, last for decades, 70 percent of the state’s population lived in counties that would face a capacity shortage within only 15 years. More frightening, the studies indicated 40 percent of the state’s population lived in ten counties with less than five years of remaining permitted landfill capacity. Without a decrease in filling rates or the development of new capacity, it was feared that many communities would soon have no place to put their waste.
Recognizing the urgency of this situation, the California Legislature passed the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. Often referred to by its Assembly Bill (AB) number, 939, this Act created programs and modified existing laws to better manage the state’s residues. One of the most notable components of AB 939, and certainly that which gets the most public attention, is the waste reduction goals it sets. California cities and counties are required to plan for and implement programs to reduce the amount of generated waste that goes to landfills, or other disposal, 25 percent by the year 1995, and 50 percent by the turn of the century.
Additionally, AB 939 set out a preferred approach, or management hierarchy, for dealing with this waste. In order of preference this is: source reduction (also known as waste prevention), recycling and composting, transformation (which includes incineration), and lastly landfilling. The plans and programs developed by communities should follow this hierarchy in addressing waste issues. Finally, AB 939 created the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) to coordinate the development and implementation of programs.
Other states in the U.S. have recognized similar waste management concerns within their borders and have reacted in a variety of ways. Many states have set waste reduction goals, though few are as aggressive as California’s 50 percent. On the other hand, some states have gone much further and simply banned the disposal of selected materials, most commonly yard waste. In 1994, nearly half the states had some form of yard waste disposal restriction in place, either at the state or local levels.
So far, legislative measures to restrict the disposal of any non-hazardous waste have not gone far in California. Preferring to leave the decision to local governments who best know what programs are feasible in their communities, the State has simply set goals to achieve. However, these goals should not be taken lightly. To achieve them will require the participation of every waste generator, public and private, and communities will be looking to those that produce the larger portions of the waste stream to help the most.
Practicing waste prevention doesn’t just make landscapers good citizens, it also can reduce their costs. Landscapers can save money by not paying to dispose of yard waste and by making their own mulch or compost