Key Findings
|
Note: This question has been taken on by a graduate student at Tufts University as part of her master’s thesis. The student is currently working on developing the method for this question. Presented below is the Evaluation Committee’s conception of the question and some findings related to the waste hierarchy from evaluation questions 4,6 and 12.
|
| |
From Evaluation Method |
| |
| The Evaluation Committee will develop a matrix that categorizes each program component into the four waste hierarchy categories and compiles information on the following: obstacles, opportunities, decisions, and relative emphasis. The matrix may look something like the following: |
| |
Component |
Waste hierarchy category |
Decision made |
Obstacles |
Opportunities |
Relative emphasis |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
From other questions |
| |
| Findings in Question 6 |
- 57% of latex paint (approximately 201,000 gallons) was recycled as paint by Metro and Amazon.
- 3% of latex paint (approximately 10,000 gallons) and 5% of oil-based paint (approximately 3,500 gallons) was reused by consumers.
- PaintCare provided collection locations an incentive of $0.25 per “reuse” gallon to reflect avoided transportation and processing costs. An organizational representative notes that no sites took advantage of this incentive; sites that were already offering reuse had systems in place and considered it an important service.
- Less than 10% of collection locations have shelves for paint exchange; PaintCare did not recruit retail sites for paint reuse due to concerns about liability [Keane, 2011].
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
