In fourth-largest city in America, an 8-year-old steps up to recycle city’s glass

Photo by Houston PressHouston Press
by Meagan Flynn
Original story here

They were halfway down the block when David Krohn’s 1977 Jeep Wagoneer, full of makeshift recycling bins and a few stray glass bottles, blew a gasket.

“Did someone shoot at our wheels?” asked eight-year-old Tristan Berlanga, the younger brother of Krohn’s girlfriend and the mastermind of this entrepreneurial endeavor.

Krohn drove the Jeep a little farther, slower, crossing his fingers that the gunshot noises coming from his exhaust would stop — because this was not the time for his car to crap out on him. He and Tristan had just set out to pick up glass from a half dozen Houston households and deliver those families their own glass-recycling bins, a trip that’s part of their new initiative, Hauling Glass.

Since the city cut glass from its recycling repertoire last March, he and Tristan and a few of Krohn’s buddies have been doing the city’s job for it: going door to door to toss several pounds of beer bottles and Topo Chico bottles into the bed of trucks or Krohn’s Jeep, then delivering all of it to a warehouse Tristan’s dad owns, where they can store all the glass recyclables no longer allowed in your green Waste Management bins. They ultimately hand it over to Strategic Materials, the largest glass processor in North America, ironically headquartered in a city that no longer offers curbside glass recycling.

And it was all Tristan’s idea, Krohn says.

“I didn’t want people to go all the way to the [large Waste Management] recycling bins,” Tristan says, while Krohn checks out the engine. “So I thought I could just take it from them instead.” His favorite part of the job, he adds, is “making people happy.”

Yeah, that’s right, leave it to an eight-year-old in the fourth-largest city in America to make collecting roughly one-fifth of the city’s recycling tonnage his responsibility, as though 2016 Houston is the setting of a bleak Victorian-era Dickensian novel.

The city cut glass recycling from curbside pickup in March, saying the alternative was cutting recycling altogether. A contract with Waste Management was set to expire March 16, and because the city was (and is) in the middle of handling a budget crisis, Mayor Sylvester Turner rejected two contract renewal offers from Waste Management because he said they were too expensive. With the March 16 deadline approaching and no contract on the table, the possibility that recycling might evaporate completely became all too real.

At the last minute, though, Turner struck a deal with Waste Management that he called a “win-win” for them both: a two-year, $2.7 million-a-year contract, but one that excluded glass, the most expensive item for Waste Management to process. At a press conference, Waste Management TexOma Area Vice President Don Smith said much of the glass can break during collection, and can rip up WM’s machinery. He said it had “negative value.”

Still, according to the city’s solid waste department, the city recycles about 5,400 tons of material a month, roughly 18 percent of which used to be glass. That’s 2 million pounds of glass per month that will now end up in a landfill, unless you haul it yourself to one of Waste Management’s large bins or sign up and pay $10 a month for Hauling Glass’s service.

Melanie Scruggs with Texas Campaign for the Environment said that, although it was good that the city was able to salvage most of its recycling program, the elimination of glass is “hugely disappointing” in a city as big as Houston. She said that, for some time, Houston has failed to develop a long-term recycling strategy, such as the “zero waste” initiative that Los Angeles and New York and Dallas have all successfully put in place, encouraging people to recycle 90 percent of their waste. Houston’s failure to hop on board, Scruggs said, is mostly due to the fact that all through former mayor Annise Parker’s tenure, the only recycling plan the administration focused on was the “one bin for all” proposal, which Scruggs called “unrealistic” and worse for recycling, since combining trash and recyclables into one container can often contaminate those recyclables and completely devalue them. Which brings us to eight-year-old Tristan and three twentysomethings picking up the city’s glass.

“We’ve just not had the political will to move us in the right direction,” Scruggs said, adding, “We shouldn’t have to rely on people with disposable income they’re willing to spend on [Hauling Glass]. Recycling glass should be available to everyone.”

In just a few short weeks, Hauling Glass has gained more than 200 customers spread across three ZIP codes, and Krohn says, “The name of the game was to just make it as easy of a transition as possible for people.” Even the week of Houston’s apocalyptic flood, Hauling Glass was still up and running; it was the week of the company’s first big pickup. Krohn or his friends will pick up glass from roughly 85 houses at a time.

After his girlfriend Googled possible problems with Krohn’s Jeep, he got back in the car believing he’d successfully repaired the fuel filter. He took the car several more blocks and crossed Washington Street, on the way to his route — only for the Jeep to slow to a crawl.

“I think this is a good metaphor for how this glass recycling company has been running,” Krohn said. “Just kind of making it up as we go and figuring out how to get it done.”

He and Tristan crawled on back to Krohn’s house and parked the Jeep in back. They clinked Topo Chicos and Krohn made some phone calls, looking for a way, and a truck, to finish the last six houses of the night.


Recycling will stay – Zero Waste should be next

TCE Blog
By Melanie Scruggs, Houston Program Director

This month, thousands of Houston residents spoke out to save curbside recycling and to challenge the notion that tossing valuable resources into landfills is a viable option for the nation’s fourth largest city. Houstonians emailed Mayor Turner and City Council, signed multiple petitions, made phone calls, testified at City Hall and spread the word on social media.

The result: City Hall and their contractor responded to public outcry and made a temporary deal that will continue Houston’s curbside recycling with a short-term agreement. The two-year deal gives city officials the opportunity to explore other recycling contracts through competitive bidding and potentially bring more recyclers to Houston—which is exactly what we need to prevent one, huge company from having too much influence over a public service as important as curbside recycling.

majorcitieszerowastegoal

It’s not all good news. In the short term, Houston’s curbside recycling will unfortunately not accept glass. Residents are encouraged to reduce and reuse glass containers, and deliver them to neighborhood depositories for recycling. According to the City of Houston eNewsletter, “Glass currently has no value on the commodities market, breaks down during collection and transportation and is unduly destructive to the processing equipment.”

Not recycling glass curbside is a big step backward, and neighborhood drop-offs are by no means a perfect substitute. Less recycled glass means less energy savings and climate benefits, more landfill tonnage, and fewer economic opportunities in the glass recycling industry. Just because commodity prices for glass are low right now should not mean more glass going into landfills.

This highlights one of the biggest problems we face in the waste and recycling conversation: the false economics and hidden costs that make recycling appear to be more expensive than landfills — in Texas, anyway. There are costs associated with trashing glass instead of recycling it—wasted natural resources, greenhouse gas emissions and long-term landfill pollution, to name a few—but since those don’t show up on Waste Management’s balance sheet, we get told that “glass has no value.” It’s a classic business externality.

Of course, we want glass recycling to return and we want more recyclers to build facilities in Houston. But how do we get there?

The solution is to start planning to divert more materials from landfills every year. The next step to take today is to set a long-term diversion goal, or “Zero Waste goal” for Houston. What that means is making a commitment that Houston will divert up to 90% of waste from landfills within the next few decades. In case that sounds like a pie-in-the-sky notion, you should know that Dallas, San Antonio and Austin are already on record with Zero Waste as their goal. San Francisco is already recovering over 75% of its waste. Los Angeles is over 75%. Seattle is at 56%.

And it’s not just cities. Walmart cited significant progress toward its Zero Waste goal as its top sustainability achievement last year. Toyota and Subaru are already both recovering over 90% of their waste. Xerox has a zero waste packaging and ink program. They’ve realized that it’s wildly unrealistic NOT to work toward Zero Waste—and we should too.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Transforming Waste Tool, a Zero Waste goal is the least difficult and first priority step that cities can take to transform a waste program that is dependent on landfills and incinerators into one where discards become resources for people to use through recycling, reusing, composting and new product designs.

Some local residents have responded with different solutions, however, that revolve more around paying for services than how we craft the policies themselves. Since the City budget is approaching a revenue and expense shortfall between $129 and $160 million, some Council members earlier in the month suggested abandoning recycling instead of paying up $1-2 million more per year (since the alternative of landfilling all discards would mean nearly $2 million more in landfill costs). In response, the Houston Chronicle and others have proposed a garbage fee.

It’s worth pointing out that a garbage fee could be used to incentivize recycling through a system known as Save Money and Reduce Trash (SMART) pricing or “Pay As You Throw,” which would allow people to pay less if they produce less trash. Texas cities like Austin and San Antonio do this by offering different sized containers. Having a dedicated source of funding for the Solid Waste Department would ensure its ability to plan for the future. A garbage fee is only useful, however, if its future is clear, transparent and if the public knows what the money will be spent on. It has to be part of a long-term solution, not just a momentary band-aid. Before we consider a garbage fee, in other words, we should adopt a Zero Waste goal and then see when and how the fee could be implemented under that plan.

RELATED NEWS STORIES
Houston Chronicle: Council votes Wednesday on recycling contract that’s pricier than other Texas cities’
Houston Public Media: Houston Recycling Industry Concerned About Losing Curbside Glass Pickup
Houston Matters: Friday’s Show on Recycling
Resource Recycling: Advocates of glass recycling blast Houston contract

Our next step as an environmental organization is to launch an education program supported by a grant to TCE Fund from the Jacob & Terese Hershey Foundation. This will include an oral presentation that we can present to your neighborhood group, business or club. We will circulate new fliers through our door-to-door canvassing work with information on how to use the big, green bins properly (keep out the glass!) and why it is important for protecting our local ecosystems and environment.

We are strongly advocating that Mayor Turner and City Council pass a Zero Waste goal as soon as possible. As we’ve seen over the past month, when Houstonians make their voices heard, together we can get things done.


City strikes recycling deal that eliminates glass

Houston Chronicle
by Rebecca Elliot
Original article here

Glass no longer will be accepted in Houston’s curbside recycling program under a two-year
deal with Waste Management, Mayor Sylvester Turner announced Friday.

The city’s curbside recycling program was in limbo after city officials and the Houston based
waste giant hit an impasse this week over contract negotiations, prompting concerns
about a potential lapse in service.

Collections will continue uninterrupted under the new agreement, but the 96-gallon green
bins will be limited to paper, cardboard, plastics and metal cans. Glass containers still can
be dropped off at the city’s neighborhood depositories but no longer will be allowed in the
curbside bins.

Eliminating glass will lower the processing costs for Waste Management.

“This agreement makes good economic sense for the city and for Waste Management. It
reaffirms our commitment to recycling. It doesn’t tie the city to a long-term contract,”
Turner said. “It allows Waste Management to avoid the employee layoffs that would have
likely resulted from cancellation of service in Houston and provides an opportunity for
potential competitors to enter the market.”

The city’s current contract with Waste Management has been extended from March 16
until March 23, when City Council next meets and can review the proposed agreement.

Don Smith, Waste Management’s area vice president, lauded the deal.

“We’re committed to ensuring that recycling is a long-term viable option for the city of
Houston,” Smith said, noting that glass not only is a negative-value commodity but also
contaminates fiber and plastic materials when it breaks.

“Removing glass from the recyclable stream was not an easy decision, and some would call
it a painful decision. But it was a necessary decision,” Smith said.

Under the new agreement, the city would pay Waste Management $90 per ton to process
and resell its recyclables, down from $95 under a four-year contract City Council rejected
on Wednesday. Turner had proposed paying $104 per ton in a one-year deal that Waste
Management turned down.

The firm currently charges a $65-per-ton processing fee, but with commodities prices
dropping below $50 a ton, it has renegotiated many of its municipal recycling contracts to
get more favorable terms.

Turner estimated the proposed contract would cost the city $2.7 million per year. It
requires at least 75 percent of the city’s recyclables to go to Waste Management facilities.

Confused residents?

Solid Waste Management Department Director Harry Hayes estimated that eliminating
glass would cut curbside recycling by about 1,000 tons a month. That would bring
Houston’s annual recycling tonnage to about 54,000, from 66,000.

If all of that glass were sent to a landfill, it would cost the city $27,000 per month more in
tipping fees, Hayes said.

Turner acknowledged that the new deal may leave residents confused about what
materials they can recycle curbside.

“I think both parties anticipate that glass may still be placed in the bins for a few months,
and we’re prepared to deal with that,” Turner said.

Councilman Dwight Boykins, for his part, said he planned to release a robocall to 13,000
voters in his district on Friday night, informing them of the new rule.

“I’m glad that the residents of District D will not lose the recycling program … and that the
mayor has not allowed Waste Management or any corporate industry in Houston to take
advantage of the city and its financially weak position,” Boykins said.

The city must close a budget gap of more than $126 million by July 1, an effort officials
have said is likely to result in layoffs.

“It’s a win-win,” Councilman Dave Martin said. “Our fiscal affairs are our doing, not their
doing. I’m just glad that they agreed to work with us on it.”

Still, some council members expressed reservations about the deal.

“It’s good, it’s better, but it’s not something I’m interested in doing at the moment,”
Councilman Mike Knox said, noting the increased processing fee. “I’m not for spending
any more money than we’ve already spent on it.”

Councilman Greg Travis said he still was bothered that the city has not gone through a
competitive bidding process for its recycling program.

“The mayor, he’s been put in a bind,” Travis said, adding, “Is this the best we can get? We
still don’t know that, because we haven’t done competitive bidding.”

Long-term plan eyed

Texas Campaign for the Environment’s Houston program director, Melanie Scruggs,
welcomed a short-term solution that allows recycling services to continue without
disruption but said eliminating glass is a step backward.

“Not being able to put our glass in the bin means that the majority of it will probably go to
a landfill since most people who use the curbside program are not likely to take it to a
dropoff,” Scruggs said. “We would like to see a long-term plan that will attract more
recyclers and get us moving toward zero waste.”

Meyerland-area resident Brian Block agreed that the new agreement is not ideal.

“It’s a little disappointing just because it will probably be less likely that glass will be part
of recycling, and we’ll see an increase in glass in our landfills, I would imagine,” Block said.
Heights resident Virgil Worthey was unperturbed by the change.

“I don’t drink, so I don’t use a lot of glass,” Worthey said. “Everything is in plastic already.”
Another resident, Dr. Billy Gill, praised the move, saying “I would rather deal with the
glass than do away with the entire program.”

He said he and his wife frequently shop online and depend on the city’s recycling program
to get rid of a regular stockpile of cardboard boxes. However, he said the family was too
busy to worry about glass containers.

“I’m just going to have to put glass in the garbage,” he said, “because I’m not driving to a
neighborhood dropoff.”

Trey Strange contributed to this report.


City considers nixing curbside recycling

Fox 26
by Scarlett Fakhar
Original story here

Fox26RecyclingHOUSTON (FOX 26) – Curbside recycling in Houston is in jeopardy. The city is drowning in debt and the cost of recycling isn’t helping.

The contract the city has with Waste Management of Texas ends this year and the city says they are doing everything they can to negotiate a better deal. A mayor spokesperson said they simply can’t afford to sign another long term agreement.

With the cost of oil low, the value of recyclable items is down too. Until prices improve the city said a short term contract with Waste Management of Texas is the only sensible option.

“The mayor has been looking at some other options,” said Janice Evans, a mayor spokesperson. “Maybe not having this new contract be for so long or maybe doing a shorter contract so that when the markets recover we can go back and take another look at it.”

Evans said the mayor is working directly with contractors to negotiate a better deal for a shorter period of time.

“Right now it really is a matter of the markets,” she said. “Everybody knows the oil industry is currently in a decline, there’s a pull effect, and the recycling market is also in decline.”

But, Evans added the city knows they will profit from the recycling program again sooner or later, and plan to move forward with curbside recycling one way or another.


Scruggs: Our environment pays if Houston doesn’t recycle

Houston Chronicle
Op-Ed by Melanie Scruggs, Houston Program Director
Original article here

Three-BinsDecades ago, when the Texas economy was not as diverse as it is now, the boom-and-bust cycle of oil production could wreak havoc on our lives in Houston. Even today, we feel the effects as energy companies cut back. Sure, cheap gas at the pump is nice to some, but we know it comes with many different kinds of costs.

Here’s another cost we now must consider: prices for recyclable materials have plummeted in part due to low oil prices and reduced demand. For now, tossing our trash into landfills appears cheaper than recycling. As a result, and spurred by the more immediate financial challenges at City Hall, several newly elected Houston Council members are arguing that we should “suspend” curbside recycling. Giving in to such a short-term, one-dimensional viewpoint would be the wrong thing to do as a leading city in the 21st century.

Back in 2008, the New York Times called out Houston for having one of the nation’s worst recycling rates – an abysmal 3 percent. City leaders ever since have responded by ramping up recycling. As of this past year, curbside recycling finally reached every single-family home served by the city, and our diversion rate has increased to around 20 percent. The current call to eliminate curbside recycling, however, confirms the need to commit to long-term recycling goals.

One challenge is that most Houstonians aren’t even seeing, let alone paying, the true costs of landfills. In the business world, this is called an externality because it means externalizing what should be an internal cost. Roughly 40 percent of Texas landfills that are required to monitor for groundwater pollution are leaking. Landfills often have long-term pollution and safety costs that are borne by we the taxpayers or property owners. Just ask the neighbors in Waller County, who have spent over $1.5 million fighting a proposed landfill from being built, or the city of Austin, which will pay more than $1 million per year for 30 years to care for a closed landfill. “Cheaper than recycling” is part of the landfill illusion.

Much of the invisible cost of wasting is also upstream. Mining for raw materials generates immense pollution, and the degradation to the air, land and water is often never repaired. Transporting, refining and manufacturing those raw materials into products consumes tremendous amounts of energy. Recycling can reduce these life-cycle costs dramatically. For example, it takes nine times more energy to make an aluminum can from raw materials than from recycled aluminum. City Council won’t see these pollution savings on a balance sheet when they vote on Wednesday, but if they stop curbside recycling in Houston, the environment will pay for it up and down the supply chain.

There are also social justice costs that we cannot ignore. Environmental burdens are borne disproportionally by the communities that live closest to landfills, as Council member Jerry Davis pointed out last Wednesday. Decades ago, Dr. Robert Bullard, Texas Southern University’s dean of the Barbara Jordan-Mickey Leland School of Public Affairs, developed the idea of environmental racism when he discovered that waste facilities, landfills and now-closed incinerators in the Houston area were disproportionately located in black and Latino neighborhoods. Race has been a bigger factor than class in determining where these facilities are sited.

Responsible recyclers and composters, on the other hand, stop landfills from growing and generate jobs for the working class. Sustainable industries that conserve the planet’s resources and reduce greenhouse gas emissions are precisely the kind of economic development areas that we should be focusing on. According to a 2013 study by the Houston-Galveston Area Council, the recycling, reuse and remanufacturing industries in the Greater Houston area contributed more than $4.2 billion in industrial output and more than 21,000 jobs. City Council can help build on that foundation by voting to continue curbside recycling, an issue that will be before council on Wednesday.

Certainly, recycling isn’t a silver bullet that will solve all of our waste problems, but landfilling is far worse. We need to prevent and reduce waste right from the start, reuse everything we can after that, and yes, recycle the rest. Council has an important decision Wednesday to either stick with our values or give up when times get tough. We are hopeful that with enough citizen input, they will keep us moving in the right direction.

Scruggs is Houston program director for Texas Campaign for the Environment.


City Council ponders trashing curbside recycling

Scott Toschlog
CW 39 NewsFix Houston

CW39 story

HOUSTON, TX– While folks were enjoying all the tasty local food served at Houston City Hall’s farmers market Wednesday, something much less tasteful was on their minds– the prospect of city council putting an end to curbside recycling.

“The City of Houston has invested millions of dollars since 2009 investing in expanding the curbside recycling program, and it was only completed last year,” explains Melanie Scruggs with the Texas Campaign for the Environment. Scruggs sat in on the council meeting Wednesday, “Several of the council members expressed concerns about the cost to the city and some council members suggested we should just abandon recycling altogether.”

Those included Mike Knox and Greg Travis. Travis explains his concerns, “It used to be profitable for the city. We were actually making money on it, but now it’s actually gonna be costing us to the tune of about $4 to 5 million a year. So I’m actually looking to maybe suspend it… not suspend the recycling, but the curbside pickup.”

Janean Partridge who works downtown thinks that would be a big mistake, “I use curbside recycling all the time. It’s something that I’ve integrated into my daily life.”

Donna Dikden says it more than just convenience, “It’s our environment that’s at stake. Whether or not it’s profitable to the city, that shouldn’t be one of the considerations.”

What are some of the considerations they should be looking at?

“If you make it less convenient, you get less recycling,” says Ebonee Mathis, who is concerned with sustainability.

Jackie Young with the San Jacinto River Coalition says it also doesn’t make sense job-wise. “Every 10,000 tons of waste that goes to a landfill creates one job at that landfill,” she notes, “For that same amount of waste, if it were to be sorted and separated properly, that would create 10 jobs in the recycling industry.”

There is also the issue of environmental injustice. “The landfills in the city of Houston are in non-white neighborhoods,” says Benjamin Franklin with the Safe Communities Alliance, “and so you’re asking these neighborhoods that already deal with disproportionate waste to take more trash that’s not theirs.”

City council was supposed to decide on the fate of curbside recycling Wednesday morning but tabled the vote until next week. We’ll see if they take the advice printed right inside the lids of many of their big, green bins: ‘Recycle Today, Rewards Tomorrow.

If not, we may all lose.


Mayor Turner: Houston’s One Bin Program All But Dead

Florian Martin
Houston Public Media

More than three years after its inception, the city of Houston’s proposed “One Bin For All” recycling project is going nowhere. Mayor Sylvester Turner says it’s not “something I want to move forward with right now, if at any time.”

The One Bin For All program would let Houstonians throw all trash in the same bin, to be separated for recycling later. The hope was to push up Houston’s low recycling rate. But now the city could end up with no recycling at all.

The city council on Wednesday delayed a vote on a new contract with Waste Management, which would cost the city about $3 million more per year because commodity prices for recyclables are low.

Several council members are calling for suspending recycling until that changes.

The One Bin program was not mentioned at all in the discussion.

It turns out Mayor Sylvester Turner is not a fan.

“I’ve looked at and read the paper that’s been presented from what was done,” he said. “I’m not convinced that that is something I want to move forward with right now, if at any time, but it’s not a part of this conversation.”

Jim Lester, president of the nonprofit Houston Advanced Research Center and One Bin For All advisory committee member, thinks the One Bin program would help dealing with low commodity prices, because as part of it recyclables could be made into new products.

“I just think that having really smart technology turning into a product that you can sell is probably a better step,” he said.

Melanie Scruggs with the nonprofit Texas Campaign for the Environment disagrees.

“It just failed to work in Montgomery, Alabama. The city of Indianapolis is stopping their plans to go to a one-bin program,” she said. “It’s clearly not economical given how contaminated the recyclables get when they’re mixed together with the trash.”

Former Mayor Annise Parker tried to start the project after winning a $1 million grant for it in 2013, but it never took off before she left office.

The city council is set to vote on the new recycling contract next Wednesday. It will not affect the One Bin project.


What Happened to Houston’s ‘One Bin for All’ Program?

Houston Public Media
By Florian Martin
Original story here

Chaz Miller, Houston Public Media

It has been almost three years since the city won a $1 million grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies for the One Bin For All concept, which would let Houstonians throw all their waste in one bin, to be separated for recycling later.

Former Mayor Annise Parker tried to start the project, but it never took off under her watch.

On Dec. 31, Parker’s last work day, the city released a 10-page progress report.

It only says that contract negotiations for a sorting facility are ongoing and that there is currently a proposal on the table that would be privately financed. The city is not saying who that contractor is.

“You’ve got to wonder whether this is a project that the city is really committed to – why they would wait until the very last minute to release that report,” said Melanie Scruggs, Houston program director of Texas Campaign for the Environment.

Her group has always opposed One Bin For All. They doubt the city can achieve its goal of recycling up to 75 percent of waste because regular trash would contaminate some of the recyclables when they are put in the same bin.

They also fear the new facility would contribute to air pollution.

At this point at least, Mayor Sylvester Turner is not trying to move the project along.

“I am almost singly focused on two things,” Turner said when asked about One Bin. “And that’s infrastructure in relation to this pothole problem and then getting our arms around our financial challenges.”

The fact that this project is dragging along is good news for Scruggs.

“We are optimistic that the proposal will be shelved,” she said. “The city’s current curbside recycling program was expanded last year and is now in all neighborhoods for the first time, where people have the opportunity to put their recyclables in a second bin.”

She said the group continues to advocate a zero-waste goal and even calls for a three-bin program, which would add a separate bin for compost.

That is already happening in Austin and San Antonio.


The 10 Most Toxic Items At Dollar Stores

Country Living
By Molly Rauch
Original article here

When it comes to safety, dollar-store deals might not be a bargain after all. Recent testing of their products found that 81% contained one or more hazardous chemicals. The tests, conducted by the consumer testing group Healthy Stuff, found chemicals associated with cancer, obesity, diabetes, asthma, thyroid and kidney diseases, learning problems, lower IQ, birth defects and early puberty. Here are 10 items you’re better off buying elsewhere.

1. Electronic Accessories

1452271215-wdy-toxic-dollar-store-products-electronic-accessories-getty

Extension cords, USB charging cords and cell phone charger cables from dollar stores tested high in chlorine, a sign that the items were made with a plastic called polyvinyl chloride, or PVC. PVC is made from vinyl chloride, a cancer-causing chemical that has harmed workers and contaminated communities close to the factories. Pick up these accessories from electronics stores instead.

2. Plastic Kitchen Utensils

1452271220-wdy-toxic-dollar-store-products-plastic-kitchen-utensils-getty

Those black slotted spoons and spatulas may contain high levels of bromine, a component in brominated flame retardants, or BFRs. Though these are added to make the products resistant to fire, they’ve been linked to cancer, birth defects and impaired brain development, and have been banned or phased out in the U.S. So what are they doing in kitchen utensils? Suppliers are likely substituting cheap, hazardous recycled content–probably from old electronics–for virgin plastic. Products made with such recycled plastic can be contaminated with BFRs, and our regulatory system misses them. Instead, choose stainless steel.

3. Flannel-Backed Table Covers

1452271225-wdy-toxic-dollar-store-products-flannel-backed-table-covers-getty

Protecting your table from scratches and stains, these bright, reusable covers seem like a good way to add a festive feel to your feast. But recent testing uncovered high levels of lead, aneurotoxic metal that is especially harmful to fetuses and children. It can reduce IQ and cause behavioral problems. Vinyl tablecloths aren’t a good alternative, because they’re made with cancer-causing vinyl chloride. Instead, look for a reusable, washable cloth table cover or a disposable paper or plastic one.

4. Metallic Christmas Garlands

1452271231-wdy-toxic-dollar-store-products-christmas-decor-getty

Saving on once-a-year items makes good financial sense. But these have tested high in bromine, indicating that some are made with recycled plastics containing BFRs. These can seep into household dust, possibly causingthyroid problems, memory impairment and other health issues. In general, clear and translucent plastics don’t have the hazardous recycled content, so look for see-through garlands or paper varieties, or make your own out of good old popcorn and cranberries.

5. Silly Straws

1452271236-wdy-toxic-dollar-store-products-silly-straws-getty

These have tested high for levels of DEHP, a phthalate (pronounced “thal-ate”) used widely in consumer products, usually to soften brittle plastics. Some phthalates interfere with the body’s endocrine system, and studies have linked phthalate exposure to asthma and allergies, prostate and testicular cancer and type 2 diabetes. Six phthalates, including DEHP, have been restricted in children’s products–but silly straws aren’t technically children’s products, so they can legally contain high levels of DEHP.

6. Vinyl Floor Coverings

1452271241-wdy-toxic-dollar-store-products-vinyl-mats

Flexible, adhesive bath mats from dollar stores have tested high in both phthalates and chlorine. Jeff Gearhart, research director ofHealthy Stuff, is especially concerned about the impact of phthalates because they’re used in so many different products. “Exposures are from multiple sources and affect multiple parts of our bodies,” he says. He recommends avoiding products that have the word “vinyl” on the label.

7. Holiday Light Strings

1452271246-wdy-toxic-dollar-store-products-holiday-lights-getty

Handling such products as you style your tree could spread toxic dust to your hands, and then you might ingest it. Hard to swallow, considering the high levels of chlorine and bromine (and therefore PVC and flame-retardant chemicals) in these have been linked to cancer and thyroid problems. When buying holiday lights, check the tag to make sure they are RoHS-compliant. (“Restriction of Hazardous Substances” is a European toxics standard that limits some flame retardants in electronics).

8. Metal Children’s Jewelry

1452271252-wdy-toxic-dollar-store-products-childrens-jewelry

All that glitters is not safe: Recent tests showed earrings from dollar stores with high lead levels, exceeding Consumer Product Safety Commission regulations. Lead can leach out of jewelry when children suck or scratch it, and ingesting even tiny amounts of the heavy metal can harm children’s brain development. Since most products never get screened for toxins, and can slip through even when they surpass federal safety standards, skip jewelry like this completely.

9. Metallic Beads

1452271257-wdy-toxic-dollar-store-products-metallic-beads-getty

Mardi Gras may mean Fat Tuesday, but throw in some dollar-store garlands, and it’s Toxic Tuesday instead. These necklaces tested high in bromine, indicating that recycled plastic was probably the filler ingredient for the beads. Gearhart has estimated that “a single year’s inventory of Mardi Gras beads may contain up to 900,000 pounds of hazardous flame retardants and 10,000 pounds of lead.” Unless you are partying in the French Quarter, just say no to metallic beads.

10. Window Clings and Removable Wall Stickers

1452271263-1428432875-window-clings-corbis

Whether life-size photos of favorite sports stars or colorful holiday graphics, don’t be tempted to redecorate your children’s walls or windows with these. They tend to contain PVC, which the American Public Health Association has called “among the most hazardous of plastic materials” and urges action to phase out the material from homes, schools, hospitals and daycare centers.

Discount retailers can do better–Walmart and Target are responding to consumer demand for safer products, requiring their suppliers to phase out the most harmful chemicals–but so far top dollar store CEOs haven’t responded to requeststo get toxic chemicals off their shelves. What should dollar stores do about toxic chemicals in their products? Click here to let the CEOs of Dollar Tree, Family Dollar and Dollar General know what you think.


Looking back on our work in 2015

TCE Blog
Melanie Scruggs, Houston Program Director

What a challenging and busy year it has been for Texas Campaign for the Environment (TCE) and our sister non-profit, Texas Campaign for the Environment Fund (TCE Fund). We knocked on over half a million doors all across Texas, and spoke face-to-face with more individuals about the environment than any other group. We have been honored to organize in coalition with new allies and strengthen old relationships in the Texas environmental movement. We had plenty of fun along the way, as always. If there’s one thing we have all learned from canvassing, it’s that if we aren’t having fun, we aren’t doing it right!

Victory on Toxic Chemicals in Consumer Products

pier1action3

TCE and TCE Fund have joined with allies across the country to pressure retailers to remove toxic chemicals from products they sell and adopt broad policies to direct their suppliers to use safer chemicals. This leverages the economic power of retailers to produce big changes in the market as a whole, eliminating dangerous chemicals even if the government won’t act.

Since May 2015, we have participated in national campaigns targeting Walgreens, Macy’s, Costco, Best Buy, Pier 1 Imports and the three national dollar store chains. We helped organize demonstrations outside Walgreens and dollar stores as part of national days of action. TCE and TCE Fund led the efforts that succeeded in holding Fort Worth-based Pier 1 Imports accountable on phasing out the use of toxic flame retardants. In addition, Macy’s has also agreed to remove toxic flame retardants from upholstered furniture.

Moving Forward on Zero Waste in Major Cities Throughout Texas

In the DFW area, TCE Fund is doing our first ever poll on people’s perception and understanding of recycling. This data will help us develop and implement an effective communications strategy around recycling in multi-family and commercial buildings, the source of 75% of the discards in the city.

TCE and our allies in Houston are running out the clock on “One Bin for All,” a proposal to do away with curbside recycling by mixing recyclables and trash to potentially be burned later. Instead, the City of Houston has finally provided curbside recycling bins to ALL the residents it serves. We have become a resource on these so-called “Dirty MRFs,” quoted in national trade journals and local press as far away as Alabama as companies continue to pitch this wasteful path to other communities.

TCE was also successful in getting recycling and other resource recovery goals included in the comprehensive Plan Houston document. This can provide the basis for a Zero Waste vision for Texas’ largest city, including new policies like recycling in multi-family buildings and areas where neighborhood associations handle waste and recycling contracts.

caldwellcoIn Central Texas, we are working with allies in Caldwell County to promote economic development through Zero Waste while they fight a permit for a proposed giant landfill. We presented at a Zero Waste Business Conference sponsored by the City of Austin and we have been educating Austinites about why and how the city should have curbside composting as a Zero Waste and Climate Protection Strategy.

Progress on Producer TakeBack Recycling for Household Batteries

batterreport

For the first time ever, the Texas House of Representatives considered statewide legislation to make battery manufacturers set up free recycling programs for household batteries, including both single-use and rechargeable varieties.  TCE Fund issued a detailed report titled “Recycling Not Included” to provide policy-makers with background on the need for producer takeback recycling to protect the environment and public health.  The legislation received a hearing in the House Environmental Regulation Committee, a key step toward moving the legislation forward in the next session. Since then the Speaker of the Texas House has issued an interim charge to hold hearings on how household hazards like batteries can be handled more effectively in Texas.

State Legislature Took Aim at Environmental Protection

vigil

The Texas legislative session was held in the first five months of 2015, and it was rough for the environment and local control. Legislators passed House Bill 40 which stripped Texas cities of their power to protect residents’ health and safety with regards to oil and gas facilities. Texans also lost important opportunities to oppose permits for polluting facilities through the Contested Case Hearing process when Senate Bill 709 passed. As bad as these bills were, however, our efforts forced some compromises that prevented them from being even worse. There were also attempts to pre-empt local control on single-use bags and heritage tree ordinances which TCE and our allies were able to defeat. TCE also helped pass legislation to increase accountability on ammonium nitrate facilities like the one in the City of West which exploded in April 2013 and killed 15 people. TCE generated letters to many legislators from constituents for and against various pieces of legislation both during and after the session.

Canvassing with Tablets to Increase Our Powertabletsfortce

TCE and TCE Fund are pioneering a switch from canvassing with clipboards and pens to tablets. With digital tools and instant data entry, TCE Fund will be able to communicate with tens of thousands more Texans every year –meaning we will generate thousands more emails, calls and petition signatures to decision-makers. This will put more public pressure on government and corporations alike, which is what it will take to put good environmental policies in place and defeat the bad ones.

Strong Support for TCE and TCE Fund’s Initiatives

TCE Fund has diversified its funding sources with important new contributions made by some of Texas’ most respected philanthropic foundations. So far, five foundations have backed our work in 2015. The Meadows Foundation awarded TCE Fund $50,000 which is being matched by eight generous individual supporters. Together with other foundation grants, TCE Fund has raised a total of $135,000 in support of TCE Fund’s push for recycling in multi-family and commercial buildings in Dallas and digital canvassing statewide. Other 2015 foundation supporters include: The Hoblitzelle Foundation, Eugene McDermott Foundation, Harold Simmons Foundation and the Educational Foundation of America.

TCE Fund also receives funding from dedicated community giving days such as Amplify Austin and North Texas Giving Day. TCE Fund also participates in EarthShare of Texas, which facilitates employee giving through payroll contributions and other workplace partnerships. Since 2014, TCE Fund has been benefiting from vehicle donations. Other generous major donors and community contributions from people contacted through the canvass continue to be critical to TCE and TCE Fund’s success.

Check out this Storify history of 2015:

We expect 2016 to be even better as we are better prepared — with new technology and staff capacity — to take on the challenges ahead. Thanks for making it all possible and for organizing with us.

Take Action