Since it doesn’t have a dryer, RIRRC must frequently reject wet recycling loads.
This story was originally published in EcoRI News, a publication partner of Ocean State Stories.
JOHNSTON — The list of what can and can’t go into the recycling bin befuddles many. Soda bottles? Yes. Plastic bags? No. Pizza box with “a little grease?” Yes. Pizza boxes “soaked in grease, sauce, and cheese?” No. Paper in a standard letter size? Yes. Paper smaller than a business card? No.
And recyclers could do everything right, diligently follow the rules, and the loads might still be contaminated, through no fault of their own. Blame Mother Nature. When it rains or snows, especially if the weather is severe, the state’s recycling facility frequently has to reject recycling loads.
“Although the corporation does not have readily available data that specifically tracks the number of loads rejected due to moisture concerns, experience indicates that they do increase particularly during the heavy rain events that we seem to be seeing more of,” said Rhode Island Resource Recovery Corporation (RIRRC) spokesperson Jared Rhodes.
RIRRC’s Materials Recycling Facility (MRF) doesn’t have a dryer, like some other facilities, to wick the moisture out of a wet load to prevent the materials from clogging the machines. So even if it is otherwise clear, wet loads could be rejected.
More rejected recycling loads create both environmental and monetary challenges. More waste ends up in the landfill, which is rapidly running out of space, and communities are charged both a fine and tipping fee for the load that would have otherwise gone through the MRF for free.
Several municipalities have seen upticks in rejected loads during rainy or snowy weather.
“Providence has been experiencing moisture-compromised load rejections over the past two years. If a recycling load or truck contains excessive moisture, RIRRC automatically rejects it,” according to city spokesperson Anthony Vega. “This is because moisture causes paper goods to break down into a paste-like substance, which then adheres to and contaminates other materials. Their automated processing system cannot effectively sort and process these compromised materials.”
When Rhode Island was hit by back-to-back heavy rain storms in December 2023 and January 2024, Charlotte Canner, the recycling coordinator for both South Kingstown and Narragansett, said those towns saw more rejections. “It does happen,” she said.
“Inclement weather does increase rejections,” Joseph DiCarlo, Cranston’s clean city coordinator, told ecoRI News. He explained they can’t ask haulers to shield their trucks. “They’re out there all day in the heavy rains.”
“It does get expensive,” DiCarlo said of the tipping fees and fines.
RIRRC charges municipalities a $64-per-ton tipping fee on waste. Recycling is processed for free. If a load is rejected at the MRF, the corporation charges the city or town an additional $250 fee.
Those rejected loads also then contribute to a municipality’s total waste load to the Central Landfill, and when a municipality exceeds its waste cap, which Providence has done frequently the past few years, the tipping fee goes up to $115 per ton.
While those fees add up to sometimes big costs in the present, more waste in the state’s only landfill could cause big fees for Rhode Island in the future. The most recent estimates give the landfill 20 more years until it’s full. ecoRI News has reported that it’s unclear what happens after that.
The landfill has already been expanded six times in its 40-year history. It’s possible the site could be expanded again, the state could start a new landfill somewhere else, or, as some other states have done, Rhode Island could pay to ship its trash somewhere else. Connecticut chose the latter option when it ran out of room for its trash in-state and spends tens of millions of dollars a year to ship waste to places such as Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Rhode Island has recognized that space is an issue and passed laws that require municipalities to recycle 35% of their waste, though few communities reach this goal.
In the case of wet recycling, some facilities have dryers to process wet recycling before it goes through the sorting machine. Models vary and costs range between tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The MRF doesn’t currently have a dryer, “but the corporation will be assessing all opportunities for improving its processing capabilities as it sets about designing the State’s next MRF,” Rhodes wrote in an email to ecoRI News.
RIRRC issued a request for proposals on a MRF redesign in June, with one of the goals to “ensure alignment with state solid waste and recycling policy goals.”
“The corporation is not aware of any MRF’s in this region (old or new) that utilize drying equipment to reduce the moisture content of inbound loads to processable levels,” Rhodes wrote. “It is suspected that this is related to the high energy costs that are assumed to be needed in drying saturated fiber materials in particular vs. the value of the resulting products in the commodities markets. As a result, the corporation is currently of the opinion that such an approach likely would not be cost effective in reducing moisture-driven rejections here at RIRRC.”
While several Rhode Island communities said bad weather was an issue for recycling, others noted it wasn’t really a problem especially compared to other types of contamination.
“It’s an issue regardless of the weather,” said Jackson Ponte, assistant programs coordinator for the East Providence Department of Public Works.
The city frequently sees rejections for loads at the MRF, some for wet materials, but often because something ended up in the recycling that wasn’t supposed to be there. Styrofoam, tires, and a microwave have all caused rejections.
East Providence spent nearly $100,000 on rejected loads last year. Ponte said 2025 has been better — residents received a mailer earlier this year explaining just how much is getting rejected at the MRF and how much the city is spending.
He knows the issue isn’t isolated. “That’s not just East Providence,” he said, “that’s all over.”
