Cities Increasingly Turn to 'Trash Police' to Enforce Recycling Laws

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,170
18,807
146
The Authoritarian Socialist left strikes again.

It simply amazes me how the Constitution and Bill of Rights is so easily thrown out with the trash these days... and by the very same people who call themselves "liberal."

Big Brother is becoming a reality, and the left is bringing it on... all funded by your stimulus dollars...

Cities Increasingly Turn to 'Trash Police' to Enforce Recycling Laws
By John Brandon

Published September 08, 2010
| FoxNews.com

Beware the green police. They don't carry guns and there's no police academy to train them, but if you don't recycle your trash properly, they can walk up your driveway and give you a $100 ticket.

They know what's in your trash, they know what you eat, they know how often you bring your recycles to the curb -- and they may be coming to your town soon. That is, if they're not already there.

In a growing number of cities across the U.S., local governments are placing computer chips in recycling bins to collect data on refuse disposal, and then fining residents who don't participate in recycling efforts and forcing others into educational programs meant to instill respect for the environment.

From Charlotte, N.C., to Cleveland, Ohio, from Boise, Idaho, to Flint, Mich., the green police are spreading out. And that alarms some privacy advocates who are asking: Should local governments have the right to monitor how you divide your paper cups from your plastic forks? Is that really the role of government?

In Dayton, Ohio, chips placed in recycle bins transmit information to garbage trucks to keep track of whether residents are recycling -- a program that incensed Arizona Sen. John McCain, who pointed out that the city was awarded half a million dollars in stimulus money for it.

Harry Lewis, a computer science professor at Harvard University and a noted privacy expert, cried foul about the "spy chips," which are already in use in several cities and are often funded by government stimulus programs. He noted that cattle farmers use the same chips to tell if Betsy the Cow has generated her milk quota for the day.

"It's treating people like cattle!" Lewis cried. Are people "supposed to produce recyclable waste, rather than certain quantities of milk"? What, he asked, happens if you don't generate enough?

But there's a clear upside to the technology, said Michael Kanellos, editor in chief of GreenTech Media.

"By tagging bins, haulers can weigh garbage, and weighing brings accountability. Consumers that diligently recycle will likely become eligible for rebates in some jurisdictions," he wrote recently. "Conversely, those who throw away excessive amounts of trash may face steeper tariffs in the future ... recycling, meanwhile, will go from being something that gives the consumer peace of mind to a way to reduce household bills."

Best and worse case scenarios

Dayton City Manager Thomas Ritchie said the city is using the chips to aid marketing campaigns, not to punish uncooperative citizens. "The data will be used to identify which residents participate in the recycling program, at what rate do they participate and the average weight of each participant’s recycling," he said.

Charlotte, N.C., also uses trash tags, and it gathers similar information. City spokeswoman Charita Curtis said the city uses the data from the tags -- low-power radio frequency IDs (RFIDs) -- to find which areas aren't recycling as often and to start education initiatives there. The data is not shared outside of the city, she stressed, and it's not used to track down specific residents. The RFID program is also voluntary.

“We can do targeted recycling education for areas with low participation, providing information on how to recycle, what can be recycled, the importance of recycling to encourage more recycling participation,” Curtis said. “Some residents may not participate simply because they don't know how to and we'd provide that education in hopes that they start recycling or recycle more.”

But there's no volunteering in Cleveland, where the trash police can fine you $100 for not recycling.

Cleveland will run reports on who fails to recycle consistently, and then it will send out the green cops, waste collection commissioner Ronnie Owens told ABC News.

In late August, Cleveland's city council voted to roll out the tags to 25,000 residents, and it may extend the program to the entire city. It costs $30 per ton to haul away trash, but the city gets paid $26 per ton to recycle it. The program should generate about $170,000 annually in revenue for the city, the Washington Times reported.

But the new equipment and bins cost $2.5 million, so it will take about 15 years to recoup the costs of deploying the technology. Cleveland officials did not immediately respond to requests for more information, but reports indicate that officials will know when you bring your trash to the curb -- and may go through your trash to ensure you're recycling properly.

Right to trash privacy

Privacy experts, meanwhile, are up in arms about how these chips are being used to collect data.

Lewis said Cleveland residents need to ask whether sacrificing their privacy -- having the government snoop through their trash -- is worth the environmental benefit. If not, he said, they should start a referendum to overthrow the ruling. Part of the issue, he said, is that the system is easy to fool: A neighbor, he said, might dump your recycling into his bin to avoid fines.

The trash police could unfairly give the worst citizens a pass, Lewis added. He warned that those generating the most waste by using bottled water instead of tap water (plastic water bottles are a major source of trash) could earn credits for recycling all those wasteful bottles -- a reward for a poor choice, in other words.

Mari Frank, a privacy expert and attorney, questioned the openness of the data. "It clearly looks like the reason for the RFID is to collect money, but the privacy issues are paramount," she said.

"I believe these RFIDs are using technology to violate our Fourth Amendment rights of search and seizure," she said. "The community should have the right to informed consent."

What comes next?

Lewis says the solution lies in improving education and awareness, not punishment. He said economic incentives work for recycling -- getting money back for aluminum cans and newspapers is a proven tactic.

Frank was skeptical about the future potential exploitation of the RFID trash collection data, and questioned whether the next step might be to attach a GPS receiver to bins to see where residents put them and how they are used. Lewis wondered whether a city might use trash collection data for other, more invasive purposes.

"If the government wanted to know our drinking habits by neighborhood or household -- purely for 'public health reasons,' of course -- it could mandate RFIDs on liquor bottles and reprogram the scanners to collect data on where the most vodka is being consumed," he said.

"And it's not just the government either. Suppose a major distiller went to your town and offered to pay to collect data about who was throwing out which kinds of bottles. They might be prepared to chip the bottles without being told they had to -- and your town might be able to use the new revenue source to hold down its tax rate."
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
It won't last. As long as you're not littering, no one can "fine" you anything legally barring some obscure local laws IIRC.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Good to hear.

Better $100 tickets now than having to turn our national parks into dumping grounds 50 years down the line.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,170
18,807
146
Good to hear.

Better $100 tickets now than having to turn our national parks into dumping grounds 50 years down the line.

The old myth that there is not enough land for landfills is just that: A bullshit myth. But nice try. Keep spouting the same nonsense scare tactics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzLebC0mjCQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18WNSjzVOcM

At our present rate of trash production, it would take a landfill with the area of only 35 miles square and 200 feet deep to store 1000 years worth of America's trash. We are NO WHERE NEAR running out of space. But I see you fell for the propaganda in Wall-E. Isn't that special?
 
Last edited:

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
7,635
2,897
136
In most of my state curbside recycling programs don't even exist, nor do recycling drop-off stations.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
The old myth that there is not enough land for landfills is just that: A bullshit myth. But nice try. Keep spouting the same nonsense scare tactics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzLebC0mjCQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18WNSjzVOcM

Scare tactics? And you aren't using them? Come on man, this is the usual libertarian slippery slope scare tactics, like almost every thread you start. So far as I can discern JUST from your faux news article, this tagging thing is only non-voluntary in one tiny part of one American city, because the city council voted for it as a pilot program. Aren't we getting just a little ahead of ourselves here?

- wolf
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,170
18,807
146
Scare tactics? And you aren't using them? Come on man, this is the usual libertarian slippery slope scare tactics, like almost every thread you start. So far as I can discern JUST from your faux news article, this tagging thing is only non-voluntary in one tiny part of one American city, because the city council voted for it as a pilot program. Aren't we getting just a little ahead of ourselves here?

- wolf

I see, so just because it's in various stages in multiple cities and not fully implemented, you don;t mind that your 4th Amendment rights are being violated with plans to violate them even more?

I bet you use this same reply for EVERY thread about yet another right sacrificed or freedom lost. How many replies will it take?
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,170
18,807
146
YAAPFT (Yet Another Amused Posting Fox Thread)

They report and you fall in line.

Yet another Authoritarian reply excusing the erosion of our civil rights in the name of the "greater good."

They command, you follow.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
I see, so just because it's in various stages in multiple cities and not fully implemented, you don;t mind that your 4th Amendment rights are being violated with plans to violate them even more?

I bet you use this same reply for EVERY thread about yet another right sacrificed or freedom lost. How many replies will it take?

No, actually I DO mind. If this happened where I live, I would vote to can it in a referendum. I, however, am not going to fear monger the issue of a local pilot program somewhere in order to spew propaganda right before an election like faux news does. Nor do I assume that just because something happens, somewhere, on a local level, that it is necessarily going to happen everywhere else. The vast majority of really stupid ideas that are implemented by city governments never make it beyond the local levels. Heck, even our "loony left" legislature in California often shoots down bad statist ideas, like the recent bill for banning plastic bags in supermarkets.

Anyway, my main point is that libertarians, who often accuse liberals of fearmongering on issues like global warming, for example, engage in constant fearmongering themselves. In fact, I can't think of a political group that fearmongers more than libertarians. And I say this being someone who agrees with libertarians at least 75% of the time on their policy stances.

- wolf
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,170
18,807
146
No, actually I DO mind. If this happened where I live, I would vote to can it in a referendum. I, however, am not going to fear monger the issue of a local pilot program somewhere in order to spew propaganda right before an election like faux news does. Nor do I assume that just because something happens, somewhere, on a local level, that it is necessarily going to happen everywhere else. The vast majority of really stupid ideas that are implemented by city governments never make it beyond the local levels. Heck, even our "loony left" legislature in California often shoots down bad statist ideas, like the recent bill for banning plastic bags in supermarkets.

Anyway, my main point is that libertarians, who often accuse liberals of fearmongering on issues like global warming, for example, engage in constant fearmongering themselves. In fact, I can't think of a political group that fearmongers more than libertarians. And I say this being someone who agrees with libertarians at least 75% of the time on their policy stances.

- wolf

If there were no outrage at the pilot programs, they would take off and become widespread policy for the simple fact of the revenue they create (think red light cameras). It IS the very outrage generated by articles like this that HOPEFULLY nip these erosions of our rights in the bud.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
If there were no outrage at the pilot programs, they would take off and become widespread policy for the simple fact of the revenue they create (think red light cameras). It IS the very outrage generated by articles like this that HOPEFULLY nip these erosions of our rights in the bud.

If you think this is about legitimate libertarian outrage rather than amping up the issue for purposes of elections then you're delusional.

There are all kinds of local laws and practices that we might get "outraged" by which you'll never see on fox news because they don't support the GOP's election hopes.

While I see your logic about nipping things in the bud, I just can't get into a tizzy about this because in general I think these kinds of ideas are extremely unpopular and will either not get enacted, or will get repealed shortly thereafter where they are. Heck, your own article mentions talk of a possible referendum to get rid of this in the one place it now exists. Already?

- wolf
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,170
18,807
146
If you think this is about legitimate libertarian outrage rather than amping up the issue for purposes of elections then you're delusional.

There are all kinds of local laws and practices that we might get "outraged" by which you'll never see on fox news because they don't support the GOP's election hopes.

While I see your logic about nipping things in the bud, I just can't get into a tizzy about this because in general I think these kinds of ideas are extremely unpopular and will either not get enacted, or will get repealed shortly thereafter where they are. Heck, your own article mentions talk of a possible referendum to get rid of this in the one place it now exists. Already?

- wolf

Yeah... I bet you siad that about red light cameras...
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
How about this? People that don't want to recycle can handle their own trash. Anything placed on public streets will be considered littering and a nuisance. Any burning of trash likewise will be a nuisance actionable in court. Hope you have a big basement for all that trash.
 

Balt

Lifer
Mar 12, 2000
12,673
482
126
Eh...

Trash collection is a service. I don't think people should be "fined", but I have no problem with people who throw away more trash (or not sorting it) paying more. That's the capitalist way, is it not?

As for privacy, once you throw it out on the curb I think you've just lost it.
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,842
4,941
136
I see, so just because it's in various stages in multiple cities and not fully implemented, you don;t mind that your 4th Amendment rights are being violated with plans to violate them even more?

I bet you use this same reply for EVERY thread about yet another right sacrificed or freedom lost. How many replies will it take?


I'd love to see you do some hard time for failing to recycle.

And for always whining so much.


90 days in county would help your attitude.




Plus your threads usually really suck.


Maybe extra time for that.
 
Last edited:

kranky

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
21,019
156
106
My neighbor has two full recycling bins every week because he drinks a case of beer a week. We don't buy very much stuff that comes in recyclable material. We take our paper recycling to the library because they get paid for how much they collect. So we only have to put out a recycling bin about every three weeks. But everything we have that is recyclable gets recycled.

The very idea that we could get fined for that because we don't generate enough trash is mind-boggling.
 

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,543
651
126
The old myth that there is not enough land for landfills is just that: A bullshit myth. But nice try. Keep spouting the same nonsense scare tactics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzLebC0mjCQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18WNSjzVOcM

At our present rate of trash production, it would take a landfill with the area of only 35 miles square and 200 feet deep to store 1000 years worth of America's trash. We are NO WHERE NEAR running out of space. But I see you fell for the propaganda in Wall-E. Isn't that special?

And I'm sure the cost to transport all of that trash will be cheap. Towns/cities/states already have to transport their trash to other states b/c their current landfills are already filled.

Amused = Ignorant
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
My neighbor has two full recycling bins every week because he drinks a case of beer a week. We don't buy very much stuff that comes in recyclable material. We take our paper recycling to the library because they get paid for how much they collect. So we only have to put out a recycling bin about every three weeks. But everything we have that is recyclable gets recycled.

The very idea that we could get fined for that because we don't generate enough trash is mind-boggling.

We only put our trash bin out every three weeks or so, recycling only once every four weeks usually. We just don't make that much garbage.

It's always funny to see "liberals" get militantly authoritarian though.
 

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,543
651
126
My neighbor has two full recycling bins every week because he drinks a case of beer a week. We don't buy very much stuff that comes in recyclable material. We take our paper recycling to the library because they get paid for how much they collect. So we only have to put out a recycling bin about every three weeks. But everything we have that is recyclable gets recycled.

The very idea that we could get fined for that because we don't generate enough trash is mind-boggling.

If you ever did, you could probably appeal and not have to deal with it going forward.

I recycle everything I can but only need to put out my bin once every couple of weeks.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
I feel like steps like this aren't very useful, since it mostly gives people an excuse to bitch about "liberals" and/or rationalize not doing what the 'police' want them to do. And regardless, it's not a very American way to approach a problem.