It’s been a busy couple of months for the world of waste management.
In the past week, two states in the U.S. have passed laws that would require companies to use waste management software to ensure they’re recycling as efficiently as possible.
California’s legislation passed in May, and last month California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill that mandates companies that recycle more than 50% of their waste to have a “green waste management plan” to reduce the amount of water, nutrients and waste generated by the products they produce.
And the state of Colorado, which was the first to pass a statewide law to require that companies recycle 100% of the waste they produce, passed its own law in December.
The first wave of legislation to require recycling and waste management was enacted in 2009, and California has been one of the states that has implemented it most.
In March, California’s state legislature passed a bill mandating companies to report on how much of their trash they’re putting into landfill.
The bill requires companies to identify their “green” waste, the most efficient waste management solution that they’re implementing to reduce waste.
The idea is that companies that do the right thing will earn a credit towards a future recycling program.
But not everyone is onboard.
The California bill passed by a wide margin, and it was quickly vetoed by California Governor Brown in January.
Now, the bill has been reintroduced in a different form.
It now mandates that companies report their “trends in green waste management.”
So how do companies do that?
It’s actually quite simple, according to Tom Loughran, the executive director of Waste Solutions, a California-based waste management consulting firm.
Companies will have to provide a plan that outlines how they’re using their waste, where it comes from, and how it’s being recycled.
Loughlyn, who has been a waste management consultant for over 20 years, says that, at the end of the day, that’s all that’s required.
Companies that don’t comply with the bill will have a zero-tolerance policy, he says.
Laughlin says that a company can only be held responsible for what it’s doing if it has the right policies and practices in place.
For example, if a company recycles a lot of waste, and that’s an environmentally friendly practice, that company can’t be held liable for the amount that they are putting into the landfill.
Licking up and disposing of waste is an important part of the process, Loughlan says, but there’s a lot that needs to be done in order to reduce environmental damage.
“There’s a whole bunch of things you can do that will help, but I think it’s really about how they want to do it, and what their sustainability goals are,” Laughlin said.
“So, if they’re a small company that’s trying to make money, they can’t expect to recycle 100%.
They can’t do it.”
But Waste Solutions does recommend that companies use a waste diversion program to reduce their landfill footprint.
A diversion program is a program where companies divert waste from a landfill site into a new facility that can recycle it.
Laying waste in the ground can also help reduce the landfill’s impact on the environment.
Waste diversion is often done by creating ponds or wetlands, or placing waste in open fields to encourage the decomposition of the material.
Laughingstocks.com, a website that tracks waste disposal trends, says the California law that requires companies using green waste to collect, reuse and recycle more waste could have an impact on waste management in the state.
But waste diversion isn’t just about the environmental impact of the landfill itself, it’s also about how companies are going to recycle their waste.
“I think if companies are not recycling their waste as effectively as they’re trying to do, then there will be a negative impact on those environmental regulations,” Loughlin said.
Latham is also concerned about how the bill would impact the state’s recycling efforts.
Lending more credence to the idea that California is in the midst of a recycling crisis, Latham says the state has more than 4 million tons of recyclable material.
That’s nearly 10% of California’s overall waste haul.
But Latham also believes that the bill may have a broader impact on California’s recycling program than Loughland suggests.
“The problem with recycling is that, in the past, it was not a priority for the state,” he said.
That may be a problem with California’s current recycling efforts, as well, as the state only recycles about 15% of its waste, which means that the amount it recycles has gone up.
Lougan says the bill is a good start to the process of improving California’s environmental footprint, but he’s worried that it will come at a cost.
“This bill does not have the intent of addressing the issue of