Lexington rethinks recycling yard waste. Curbside paper recycling could be back by fall
The city of Lexington is exploring new options for recycling and reusing yard waste.
A committee of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council on Tuesday voted unanimously to seek information from private industry on how to better recycle its yard and leaf waste.
Currently, residents with city services use Lenny carts, as well as bags for yard and leaf waste. In the fall, the city also has a separate leaf vacuum program for which people rake leaves to the curb. A truck then vacuums those leaves into the truck.
The yard waste is taken to the Haley Pike landfill where a contractor picks it up and turns it into mulch.
But there are problems with the current system.
First, it’s difficult for waste management to staff yard waste pickup because the volume produced varies depending on the season. As a result, the department has to rely on temporary workers during spring, summer and fall, city officials said Tuesday.
Vacuum leaf collection is tricky. The city only has so many trucks and can’t always time vacuum cleanup when leaves drop, said Environmental Quality and Public Works Commissioner Nancy Albright during Tuesday’s Environmental Quality and Public Works committee meeting.
Both programs divert tons of yard waste from the landfill. Both are very popular with residents.
“It can cost anywhere between $750,000 to $1 million for one pass,” Albright said of the vacuum leaf pick up.
Residents contaminate yard waste with trash
More importantly, there is a lot of contamination in the yard waste the city collects.
People often use yard waste bins as ancillary trash cans. That trash contaminates the yard waste, and the yard waste cannot be used for mulch.
Albright said during Tuesday’s meeting that one or two trash-filled Lennys can contaminate an entire truck. Contaminated yard waste must go to the landfill.
It’s not known how much yard waste is send to the landfill each year. Inspectors have seen as many as 25 percent of the trucks carrying yard waste being diverted to the landfill, Albright said.
The city pays a contractor a minimum of around $700,000 a year to take the yard waste and turn it into mulch.
The mulch quality is not good, Albright said.
“We end up giving a lot of it away,” Albright said.
The request for information would allow private contractors to give the city suggestions on handling yard waste. In previous requests for proposals for the city’s recycling program, contractors had expressed interest in combing yard waste and food waste, which creates better mulch. Lexington has a food recycling program, but it’s not run by the city.
One possible solution would cost millions
Councilman Richard Moloney said Sevierville, Tenn., has an aerobic digester that helps speed up decomposition to make compost. That program takes yard, food waste and sludge from wastewater treatment. It’s a regional facility.
“This is some of the best mulch you can find,” Moloney said. “It’s a different time. We need new ideas.”
But to build something similar in Lexington will likely cost upwards of $25 million, Albright said. The city has approximately $30 million in a landfill account that could be tapped to build an aerobic digester program, council members said.
Vice Mayor Steve Kay said he supported exploring new options for yard waste but cautioned the city’s finances are strained because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Even if the city switched to the Sevierville model, “it does not reduce our pickup costs. We still have to pick up the leaves,” Kay said.
Kay said he would like to see more public education on proper Lenny use that explains how throwing trash in those bins costs the city money and diverts would-be recyclable material to the landfill.
Kay also cautioned that the landfill fund has restrictions and the city would have to make sure that the money could be used on a capital project such as an aerobic digester.
After Tuesday’s meeting, Albright said the first step is to put out a request for information, which is a way to gather ideas. The second step is to put out a request for proposals, which is similar to a bid. If the city needs help looking at those proposals and scoring the best options, the council agreed Tuesday to set aside up to $25,000 for a consultant. The money would not come from the general fund, the city’s main checking account, but the landfill fund.
The council won’t take a final vote on the request for information until sometime in February.
Paper recycling could be back before end of year
Meanwhile, there is good news for the city’s beleaguered recycling program.
Curbside paper recycling could be back by this summer or early fall.
In December, the council approved a more than $4 million contract to overhaul and fix the city’s aging recycling center on Thompson Road. Part of those upgrades included allowing paper and glass to be separated from other recyclables earlier in the process. Separating paper earlier reduces contamination.
The city suspended curbside paper recycling in May 2019 after it could no longer find a buyer because the paper the center produces was too contaminated. The city hopes it can return to curbside paper recycling sometime in late summer or fall, Albright said.
The city set up multiple paper drop sites in January 2020 after it suspended curbside paper recycling. Participation is low. The city received a lot more paper recyclables when it offered curbside recycling services, Albright said.
