I've been involved in municipal, state, and regional conversations about mattress recycling in the Northeast. As far as states like MA and CT go, there is actually Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) in play, whereby the industries are expected to find ways to deal with the eventual waste they are presenting. You are correct; new mattress sales have a recycling fee worked into the final price, which does go to pay for the (theoretically) proper means of handling, scrapping, recycling, and landfilling of the mattresses components. Another such program in our area is PaintCare, whereby new paint purchases have a small surcharge (about $.50-$1.50, based on volume) attached, which goes to fund the recycling and/or proper disposal of both oil and latex coatings. Maine has this, too, as do Minnesota and (I think) Michigan. Mattress EPR hasn't caught fire like you think it might, based on how widespread and troublesome they have become to the solid waste landscape.
It's really about how unreluctant the manufacturers are and how serious the state government is, when it comes down to it. VT tried to get an EPR measure through the House for tire handling. It died on the floor when the industry wouldn't play ball. The thing is, some manufacturers know that bans or government-mandated handling are a reality but they also know that there are legacy wastes still in the world. One of the reasons EPR for tube TV's has been relatively easy to push is that no one is really making more of them; it's a fixed cost, in some respects. PaintCare has been a wildly successful program but it runs at a serious deficit; people bringing paint to recycle it are still dredging old cans out of their great-uncle's basement, paint which was never bought with the surcharge attached. But if Nokian or Cooper tacked on $3 to every new tire sale, they know it would never work out in their favor. People would just drive over to the nearest state to buy their tires, without an EPR fee, and then bring them to a recycling location, in-state, to unload the junk for free. On top of that, if tire recycling became free/low-cost, every collection point in the area would be swamped with tires from river bottoms and manure pile-covers, most of them having been bought well before the appropriate fees had been applied and all are now on the manufacturer's dime. Plus, with very few actual recycling outlets for scrap tire rubber, you can't expect to make anything back, that way (paint doesn't share that problem, fortunately). A car yard near me is rumoured to have more than a million tires in piles around their facility (only 750,000 of which have been documented). Quite a sh*t sandwich for the tire-makers to eat. That's the thinking that killed the tire bill in our state, anyway. IDK; I like to think that if you're flogging tires with less than two years of useful life for $80 a pop, there's room in the margin for a little responsibility. But that's none of my business...
In my opinion, a person interested in interacting with mattress recycling should opt to buy a shredder. They are not cheap but they are by far the fastest way to tear through mattresses and for a small operation, that is key. Steel is the obvious scrap in the output but the PUR foam holds some value, too, though you have to really search for buyers. The fabric can be baled and sold to rag manufacturers but the volumes necessary will probably not pan out for a small operation (I think Conigliaro in MA handles them and probably has outlets). The unsung treasure of mattress recycling is the lumber. C&D recycling is on the rise and no few markets are hungry for clean, unpainted wood. A local but large commercial hauler offered me a 40-yd rolloff and free pickup as long as I wanted, provided I could keep filling it with demolition waste, lumber in particular. Another outfit with whom I am familiar is UTEC, in MA, who employs at-risk youth to fully d-man mattresses, a much better way to get to the lumber than shredding but it sure eats up the man-hours. My real reasoning for a shredder is that a person owning such equipment could rent their services out to town bulky waste collection days, furniture wholesalers, and other places with mattress inventory. Doing it this way saves on tipping fees (last I checked, it cost upwards of $20 to landfill a single mattress, depending on your location) for everyone and, importantly, it downplays the problem waste mattresses have become, which is exactly what the mattress industry wants so that they don't have to deal with any more EPR legislation. Carpet manufacturers in CA, for example, are actually offering about $2M to state carpeting stores and installers who agree to collect and recycle carpeting on their own, just so that the CA government doesn't push the whole problem back on them. I would think anything that offers an alternative would be a valuable service, even if what was reclaimed was little to nothing, just based on how difficult an costly mattresses are as a waste item.
Bookmarks