Solid Waste Management Master Plan A Poll with Guelph Residents

Transcription

1 Solid Waste Management Master Plan A Poll with Guelph Residents Prepared by: Metroline Research Group Inc Duke Street West Kitchener, Ontario November, 2013

2 Table of Contents Background & Objectives 3 Research Methodology 4 Notes On Reading This Report 5 Key Insights 7 Findings Sample Description 9 Attitudes towards environment/waste 10 Public Drop-Off 14 Priorities For The Future 17 Waste Diversion 21 Waste Collection Model 25 Appendix 1 Interview Questionnaire 2

3 Background & Objectives The City of Guelph is currently reviewing and updating the Solid Waste Management Master Plan Public consultation is an important part of this review The objectives of this research were to: understand resident perception about the current programs and services understand agreement with priorities for the future related to solid waste management determine resident support for tax increases related to improved multiresidential waste collection and higher waste diversion programs 3

4 Research Methodology Metroline Research Group conducted a random telephone survey with 400 Guelph households between September 4-19, 2013 The survey lasted an average of approximately 10 minutes Qualified respondents for this study were male or female head of household, and Guelph resident At the overall level, a sample of 400 interviews provides a margin of error of +/-4.9%, 19 times out of 20 (95% Confidence Interval) Additionally, Metroline hosted an open version of the survey that the City of Guelph was able to publish or advertise a link to complete This survey was left online between mid-september and end of October, 2013 Final sample size was 209 usable, completed surveys 4

5 Notes On Reading This Report While sophisticated procedures and professional staff have been used to collect and analyze the information presented in this report, it must be remembered that surveys are not predictions. They are designed to measure opinion within identifiable statistical limits of accuracy at specific points in time. This survey is in no way a prediction of opinion or behaviour at any future point in time For the online portion of this research, respondents were able to selfselect themselves for participation, and no controls were placed on the sample. This information should be used for guidance and directional information only 5

6 Key Insights What have we learned? Results Summary/Commentary

7 Key Insights What have we learned? Residents are determined that Guelph should continue offering the yard waste collection program 78% strongly agree it should continue 80% of residents interviewed are aware of the Public Drop-Off and have used it at some point in time. Major uses were for disposing of Household Hazardous Waste, brush or yard waste, electronic waste, and garbage 60% of residents strongly or somewhat agree with the idea of setting up a second public drop-off location Residents agree that Guelph should improve its waste collection programs at multi-residential properties, but do not support a property tax increase to fund the improvements About two-thirds of residents are willing to support energy-from-waste options if the cost is the same or less than taking the waste to landfill Residents do not support transitioning to a user fee model for waste collection, and feel it should stay within property taxes 7

8 Findings

9 Sample Description Gender Random Online Type of dwelling Random Online Male 46% 51% Single family residence 79% 72% Female 54% 49% Multi-family residence (condo, townhouse, apartment, etc.) 21% 28% Age Ownership years 5% 18% Own 82% 69% years 24% 39% Rent 18% 31% years 49% 33% 65+ years 22% 11% Type of household Private household, immediate family 89% 75% Time in Guelph Shared with non-family members 9% 23% Less than 5 years 20% 41% Institutional or on-campus 2% 2% 5-10 years 17% 13% More than 10 years 63% 46% 9

10 Attitudes towards environment/waste When making personal purchase decisions for any type of consumer product, how important are the following? Quality and cost are two of the top three most important considerations, but a product being hazardous to the environment is up there as well (10-point importance scale) (Full sample) Source Mean Not (1-2) Somewhat (3-4) Quality/Durability Random 4.5 2% 33% 65% Whether the product is hazardous to the environment Very (5) Online 4.6 1% 36% 63% Random % 34% 54% Online % 42% 47% Cost Random 4.1 5% 48% 47% Social considerations (fair labour practices, working conditions, made in Canada/Guelph) Whether the packaging or product is recyclable or made from recycled products Amount of waste produced (packaging or product) Online 4.2 3% 48% 47% Random % 51% 32% Online % 52% 26% Random % 50% 30% Online % 56% 21% Random % 53% 29% Online % 56% 23% 10

11 Garbage Disposal What is your main method for disposing of? As expected, the scores for the various methods of collecting the three streams are very similar. 98% of garbage collection is at the curb or the garbage area of a multi-residential. Organics is slightly less, possibly due to composter usage (Full sample ) Source Garbage Recycling Organics Use bags collected by the city Random 58% 57% 56% Online 64% 60% 53% Use carts collected by the city Random 30% 30% 30% Online 27% 33% 27% Collected by private waste company Random 10% 9% 8% Online 6% 4% 5% Take to work for disposal Random <1% -- <1% Online <1% <1% -- Take to the public drop-off Random 1% 3% 2% Online 2% <1% 2% Other Random <1% 1% 4% Online <1% 2% 13% 11

12 Attitudes about Guelph Waste Management What do you feel Guelph is doing well when it comes to waste management? Residents in this survey generally seem to like the solid waste programs: It s good (general/unspecified) 31% Like the cart system/no more bags/bagless 24% Like the three stream system, pre-sorting our waste 22% They try to educate residents 15% Always trying to innovate/do better 14% Other mentions: Work hard to keep things out of landfill 5% Better/more advanced than other cities 3% Great pick up service 3% Simple/easy 3% 12

13 Attitudes about Guelph Waste Management How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following? Residents are determined that Guelph should continue offering the yard waste collection program 78% strongly agree that it should continue. In the online survey the score was lower but still strong at 62% About one-third of residents (32%) strongly agree that Guelph has an effective solid waste program for diverting waste from the landfill (5-point agree scale) (Full sample ) Mean Disagree (1-2) Somewhat agree (3-4) Strongly agree (5) Guelph should continue offering the spring and fall yard waste collection program after 2014 Guelph s curbside collection program is effective in diverting recyclable and organic materials from the landfill site Random 4.6 6% 16% 78% Online 4.3 6% 32% 62% Random % 55% 32% Online % 57% 20% Guelph is a leader in curbside collection programs Random % 60% 24% Online % 56% 15% Our community is doing enough to minimize and divert waste from a landfill through it s programs Random % 61% 21% Online % 50% 11% 13

14 Public Drop-Off Awareness/Usage (Base = Full Sample) Random Online Aware, and used in the past 80% 73% Aware, but never used 8% 11% Not aware 12% 17% 4 in 5 residents we spoke with (80%) are aware of the public drop-off and have used it at some point in time, slightly less in the online survey 8% are aware but have never been 12% of residents are not aware in the random sample. In the online survey, which was skewed younger and to newer residents of Guelph, that number was higher at 17% (Base = Haven t used drop off before) Random Online Probably will 36% 61% Might or might not 20% 34% Not likely 44% 5% 14

15 Public Drop-Off Which of the following items have you taken to the public drop-off at the Waste Resource Innovation Centre? Household Hazardous Waste was the reason mentioned most often for visiting the Public Drop-Off, followed by brush and yard waste, electronic waste, and then garbage (Ranked according to mention in random sample, base=used drop-off n=320) Random Online Household Hazardous Waste (paint, cleaners, etc.) 65% 87% Brush or yard waste 60% 65% Electronic waste (TV s, monitors, etc.) 53% 62% Garbage 53% 53% Construction and demolition materials (mixed loads or separated loads of clean wood, drywall, shingles, recyclable metal, concrete, brick rubble or toilets, etc.) 42% 53% Cardboard 36% 42% Recyclables Blue bag/cart materials 31% 27% Organics/Green waste 25% 21% Appliances (Fridge, freezer, washer, dryer, dishwasher, air conditioner) 20% 25% Mattress or box spring 19% 11% Clean fill including stones, sod and topsoil 19% 12% Car tires 11% 7% 15

16 Public Drop-Off In the future, the City of Guelph is considering setting up another public drop-off location in a different part of town. How strongly do you agree or disagree? (Base = Full Sample) Random Online Strongly Agree 45% 41% Somewhat Agree 15% 22% Neutral 20% 22% Somewhat Disagree 7% 5% Strongly Disagree 13% 10% 60% of residents strongly or somewhat agree with the idea of setting up a second public drop-off location That is three times as many residents as the 20% who disagree with the idea, in the online survey it is four times more 16

17 Priorities For The Future How strongly do you agree or disagree that the following should be priorities for improving the City of Guelph s waste management system? (5-point agree scale) (Full sample) Helping multi-residential properties find more waste reduction solutions Mean Disagree (1-2) Somewhat agree (3-4) Strongly agree (5) Random 4.4 6% 33% 61% Online 4.4 7% 32% 61% Helping businesses find more waste reduction solutions Random 4.4 6% 33% 61% Online 4.4 5% 36% 59% Investigating alternative disposal options, such as energy-from-waste Random 4.3 7% 37% 56% Online % 50% 37% Establishing a re-use centre at the public drop-off Random 4.2 8% 37% 55% Recycling receptacles in public spaces such as community facilities and parks Online % 52% 34% Random % 33% 54% Online % 36% 49% Adding more divertible materials, currently collected at the curb Random % 40% 50% Online 3.9 7% 60% 33% Expanding collection of other types of materials Random % 38% 48% Online % 50% 37% 17

18 Priorities For The Future How strongly do you agree or disagree that the following should be priorities for improving the City of Guelph s waste management system? (5-point agree scale) (Full sample) Mean Disagree (1-2) Somewhat agree (3-4) Strongly agree (5) Improving communications on existing programs Random 4.0 9% 47% 44% Education about waste minimization and how purchasing decisions can reduce waste A new sorting program to extract recyclable materials from commercial waste Online % 62% 27% Random % 47% 43% Online % 51% 34% Random % 44% 44% Online % 56% 34% Offering more diversion programs at the public drop-off Random % 47% 39% Online % 64% 21% Collecting a larger amount of divertible materials at the curb Random % 48% 39% Online 3.8 8% 64% 28% Increasing the use of backyard composters Random % 41% 38% Online % 49% 30% The City s waste management system is fine as is Random % 47% 14% Online % 41% 4% 18

19 Priorities For The Future Today, at multi-residential properties, such as condominiums, apartment buildings or townhouse complexes, waste is collected in one of two ways - by the City if the property is willing to sort their waste and use City carts or approved bags, or through the use of a private waste collection company. How strongly do you agree or disagree that Guelph should improve its waste collection program at multiresidential properties by providing another type of collection service other than carts? Respondents agree that Guelph should improve its waste collection program at multi-residential properties, average score almost 4 out of 5 (3.9) In the random sample, 59% of those currently living in multi-residential buildings strongly agree compared to 42% of those living in single family (5-point agree scale) (Full sample n=400) Source Mean Disagree (1-2) Somewhat agree (3-4) Strongly agree (5) Total Random % 39% 45% Online % 42% 45% Live in single family homes Random % 41% 42% Online % 46% 40% Live in multi-residential Random % 30% 59% Online % 33% 57% 19

20 Priorities For The Future How likely would you be to support an increase in property taxes of 0.5% (approximately $16 for a 3-bedroom single household) to provide this service? Random Online Very Likely 15% 16% Somewhat Likely 14% 22% Neutral 17% 17% Not very likely 8% 10% Not likely at all 46% 35% While residents agree that Guelph should improve waste collection at multi-residential properties, they do not support a property tax increase to fund the improvements Over half of residents interviewed in the random sample (54%) are not very or not likely at all to support a tax increase. This is lower in the online sample, at 35%, but still over a third of respondents 20

21 Waste Diversion Five years ago, the City set a waste diversion target of 70%, to be reached by the year Last year Guelph achieved a diversion rate of 68%. Knowing this, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following? Residents agree in general with moving or increasing the waste diversion target Based on the centric type response (scoring 3 or 4), it is likely that many residents agree that the idea is good, but they aren t really sure what it means to them or to the tax bill (5-point agree scale) (Full sample) Source Mean Disagree (1-2) Somewhat agree (3-4) Strongly agree (5) The waste diversion target should be greater than 70% The 70% waste diversion target should be moved ahead to an earlier year Random % 55% 30% Online % 49% 39% Random % 48% 32% Online % 50% 36% 21

22 Waste Diversion Would you support an increase in property taxes to fund programs that achieve a higher diversion rate? (Full Sample) Random Online Up 1%-2% (about $64) 8% 5% Up 0.5%-1% (about $32) 13% 19% Up 0.5% (about $16 22% 33% No support 57% 43% Almost 3 in 5 residents interviewed (57%) do not support any kind of tax increase to fund programs aimed at a higher diversion rate Once again, there was more support for some kind of tax increase in the online survey (43% of respondents do not support any tax increase) 22

23 Waste Diversion An alternative to landfill is to support technologies that are able to produce energy from waste that cannot be recycled or composted. How strongly do you agree or disagree that Guelph should support the use of this technology? (Full Sample) Random Online Strongly Agree 46% 36% Somewhat Agree 29% 32% Neutral 17% 22% Disagree 8% 10% Residents seem willing to get behind energy-from-waste technology as an alternative to sending waste to landfill. Three-quarters of residents (75%) in the random sample somewhat or strongly agree with the concept. Slightly less in the online survey, where about two-thirds (68%) agree 23

24 Waste Diversion Would you say you support the use of energy-from-waste options if the cost.? Random Online 10% more than landfill 10% 13% 5% more than landfill 24% 26% Same cost as landfill 42% 41% Less than cost of landfill 24% 20% About two-thirds of residents are willing to support energy-from-waste options if the cost is the same or less than taking the waste to landfill Those who do not support the concept are most likely to say the only way they would consider it was if it cost less than putting it in the landfill As expected, those who most strongly support the idea of energy-fromwaste, are more likely to be willing to support it at a higher cost 24

25 Waste Collection Model Currently, the cost of waste collection is paid through property taxes. In some other municipalities, the costs are covered through user fees, instead of property taxes. If that system was adopted for Guelph, residents would receive a bill based on the number and size of grey carts they use. Agree/Disagree? Random Online Strongly Agree 13% 20% Somewhat Agree 10% 13% Neutral 18% 16% Somewhat Disagree 12% 17% Strongly Disagree 47% 34% Residents are happier to keep waste collection as part of their taxes 23% agree at least somewhat with the idea of creating a user fee model, compared to 59% of the random sample who disagree at least somewhat In the online survey, respondents were a little more receptive to a user pay system, however the majority still disagree 25

26 Waste Collection Model Why do you agree/disagree? Those who agree with the User Fee model: like the idea of saving, but potentially has downfalls in extra costs or resident s cheating/not paying, etc. feel that it would encourage residents to work harder to create less solid waste want to pay for what they use, not a flat fee Those who disagree with a User Fee model: feel that they pay enough in taxes already to cover it are worried that this would be a new fee and taxes would not actually go down to match see that residents would cheat, or dump their garbage elsewhere are concerned that larger families would be burdened by the extra costs 26