|
|
The Recycle Lottery “Finally, a Lottery We Can All Agree On”
|
|
Birmingham has so much room for improvement regarding Recycling…. Let’s do something about that.
This idea is cheap, easy, exciting, innovative, and
rewarding to the citizens.
|
|
|
|
Benefits and Summary
Benefits:
· Gets people to develop the habit of recycling by tempting them with significant prizes
· Gives sponsors great publicity including good word-of-mouth
· Very inexpensive – average about $400 per year initially
Curbside recycling in Birmingham is 1% (whereas the national average is 30%)…. How can we encourage people to recycle?
Solution: Have a
Recycle Lottery that rewards people who recycle.
Here’s how: One random Birmingham household is chosen each
week. If they’ve put out curbside
recycling then they win $$$ or prizes and any of their 10 neighbors who
recycled also win.
Neighbors will tell each other about this program because
the more people in your area who recycle the more
likely you are to win. Recycling will
become associated with being good to your neighbors.
This could potentially save the City of Birmingham much money.
The prize doubles if the winner has recently visited a particular website (possibly this website), which contains info about recycling and why they should do it. (The website can have sponsor ads on it.)
The full description
How it works:
· One random house address in Birmingham is picked secretly each week. If the people at that house put out curbside-recycling that week, they win $250. Simple as that.
· Plus each of the winner's 10 closest neighbors that also put out curbside-recycling that week wins $25. This would motivate neighbors to encourage each other to recycle.
A couple of options:
· Double the prize: If the winner has been to a particular website within the past year, then that $250 prize doubles to $500.
¨ The particular website would be a site that has recycle info (how to recycle, why its good to recycle, brief profiles of Birmingham people who recycle, what good things happen to my recycled stuff, etc), and perhaps advertisements from sponsoring-partner(s).
¨ To document they were at this website, the person has to fill-out an online form with their email address and street address.
¨ Benefits: This draws eyes to the website (which benefits the sponsors), and builds you an email list of citizens at least somewhat interested in recycling.
· Instead of cash prizes, a group of sponsoring-businesses might donate a collection of prizes that the winners gets to choose from.
Costs:
· At the very most this costs under $40,000 per year in prize money: 52 weeks X [ ($250 x 2) + ( $25 x 10 neighbors) ] = less than $40,000
· If the curbside recycle rate stays at 1%, then this would cost probably less than $400 per year
· If the rate zoomed up to 30% then this would cost probably less than $12,000 per year.
Notes:
· Once people get in the habit of recycling and realize what a good and necessary thing it is, the Recycle Lottery could be discontinued. In other words, the Recycle Lottery could be used just to “create the habit”, and then if necessary discontinued later.
· Because money/prizes are involved, there will be great word-of-mouth, and therefore little advertising of this program would be required.
· Perhaps you could enlist a local newscast to announce the Recycle Lottery winner each week that someone wins.
· The psychology of real lotteries is that while very few people win, everyone thinks they have a chance and therefore they are motivated to buy a ticket. This same psychology could motivate people to recycle (when normally they would not).
· Knowing that “you may have already won” (Publishers Clearing House style) motivates people twice as much, because they for sure don’t want to lose money (by not recycling) that they’ve already won. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion)
· Possible funding source for this:
¨ The City of Birmingham of course
¨ Sponsoring-business(es)
¨ Environmentally-based local organizations
¨ Perhaps a sister-city (like Seattle) that feels recycling is so important that they have made it mandatory. They might (simply for good public relations) really enjoy at least co-sponsoring something like this, where there is potentially such a Huge Return on such a Small Investment.
Win-Win:
I see this as a real win-win-win-win situation for all involved:
·
The City of Birmingham wins because (as its
flyer says), recycling 
o Current curbside recycling in Birmingham is 1%. My quick-and-dirty analysis (using figures from the internet, see details below) shows that if the Recycle Lottery increases that to…
§ 3% (a very modest goal), the net benefit to the City is about $80,000.
§ 30% (the national average), the net benefit to the City is about $1.2 million
· Some citizens who recycle win $$$.
· Recycling is good for the environment (which everyone shares).
· Sponsoring Business(s) get good public relations and eyes to their advertising.
Some number-crunching....
What I used for quick-and-dirty analysis above
|
Fact |
Source |
|
by adopting recycling, municipalities would be able to
reduce direct costs by an average of 11%.
Note: This is perhaps the figure that I am most
uncertain about. |
|
|
It costs the town $2.38 to pick up and dispose of an
average bag of trash containing 25 lbs of waste. |
http://www.westboylston.com/Pages/WBoylstonMA_BComm/swatdir/trashcostsfaq#onebag |
|
The U.S. is the #1 trash-producing country in the
world at 1,609 pounds per person per year |
|
|
As of the census of 2000, there were 242,820 people,
98,782 households |
|
|
The national recycling rate of 30 percent |
|
Cost to dispose bag of trash (25 pounds) |
$2.38 |
|
Cost to dispose a pound of trash |
$0.10 |
|
Pounds per year per person |
1609 |
|
Cost to dispose a persons trash per year |
$153.18 |
|
Number of Households |
98,782 |
|
Population |
242,820 |
|
Number of people per household |
2.46 |
|
Savings per person if they recycle in % |
11% |
|
Savings per person if they recycle in $ |
$16.85 |
|
Savings per household if they recycle in $ |
$41.42 |
|
If 100% recycled, cost of prizes (approx) |
$40,000 |
|
At this Rate of Recycling… |
1% |
3% |
30% |
|
|
(which is the current level) |
|
|
|
# of households that recycle |
988 |
2,963 |
29,635 |
|
Savings |
$40,914 |
$122,741 |
$1,227,415 |
|
The increase in Savings |
n/a |
$81,828 |
$1,186,501 |
|
Estimated cost of prizes |
$400 |
$1,200 |
$12,000 |
|
Net
benefit |
|
$80,628 |
$1,174,501 |
Option: Double Recycle Lottery....Win $50,000 !!!
Pick 2 households at random.
If they both recycled that particular week, then they split $25,000 !!
And if either has visited the
specified website within the past year, that doubles to $50,000 !!
This would add more drama and
excitement than just offering $500 to a single household, because $50,000 is
"life-changing" money especially for some people in the neighborhoods
where recycling rates are lowest.
It also uses the concept of
peer-pressure in that:
·
If I don't recycle, not only am I risking losing my
half of $50,000, but I potentially deny someone else their half
of $50,000 too. That would be selfish of me so I will recycle, because I
know I would feel bad if I made a specific other household lose their half of
$50,000.
·
I will want to tell everyone to recycle -- to try to
increase my chance at winning.
And this is all still very
affordable as long as the recycle rate stays fairly low. For example:
·
If the recycle rate stayed at 1%, it costs on
average $5 a week.
·
If the rate zoomed up to 3%, it costs on
average $45 a week.
·
(See details in table.)
·
Of course when the rate increases to 30% or more
that's lots of money but by then hopefully people will
be in the habit of recycling (and so will just continue to do
it out of habit), and the double Recycle Lottery can be discontinued.
|
|
"Recycle
Lottery" |
double "Recycle
Lottery" |
||||
|
recycling rate |
odds |
payoff* |
On
average cost |
odds |
payoff* |
On
average cost |
|
1% |
1% |
$500
|
$5
|
0.01% |
$50,000
|
$5
|
|
2% |
2% |
$500
|
$10
|
0.04% |
$50,000
|
$20
|
|
3% |
3% |
$500
|
$15
|
0.09% |
$50,000
|
$45
|
|
10% |
10% |
$500
|
$50
|
1% |
$50,000
|
$500
|
|
30% |
30% |
$500
|
$150
|
9% |
$50,000
|
$4,500
|
|
100% |
100% |
$500
|
$500
|
100% |
$50,000
|
$50,000
|
*Payoff = is the payoff to the
winner(s) if
there is/are winner(s). It assumes that winners have visited the
website required so that their money doubles.
Otherwise, this would be less.
But what if – against all odds – there are lots of $50,000 prize winners?
…who would pay that?
Could buy Prize Insurance for that possibility
· http://www.prizeinsurance.org/
· http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prize_indemnity_insurance
Option: More prizes
I have gotten some good feedback from folks, including Jon Palone (UAB Recycling Coordinator) who says: “I like the idea of more houses winning even if the prize amount is less – The odds increase & participation should as well.”
I’ve asked other people and Google-searched, and Jon’s thought about more-prizes-are-better is definitely valid, so it could be:
· The Recycle Lottery: 10 houses each week have the chance to win $50*
· The Double Recycle Lottery: Select 10 pairs of houses each week. If both houses in a pair recycle, that pair splits $5,000*
(NOTE: These figures of $50 and $5,000 assume everyone has visited the website that doubles the prize amount. Otherwise it would be half that.)
Pros and Cons
· Pros:
¨ It would cost the same, yet there would be more potential winners
· Cons:
¨ Might not be a big enough prize amount to really get sensational press coverage
¨ More administrative work (overhead) involved, in that instead of someone going to 1 or 2 houses (to see if they put out recycling that week), someone would have to go to 10 or 20 houses.
Ø One way to lessen this overhead would be to randomly pick a “cluster”. In other words, pick one house at random and then the other 9 or 19 houses would simply be the 9 or 19 houses closest to that house.
Option: Specific neighborhood to start
Sam George (editor of the Birmingham Weekly) suggests doing this in one neighborhood initially. This would make it easier to start, increase each house’s odd of winning and enable data to be gathered before being implemented city-wide.
Option: Get churches/charities involved
If someone goes to the designated website and registers, they get to indicate their church or favorite charity.
Then if they’re selected and have put out recycling, they get $500 (in the basic example) and their specified church/charity gets $250.
This way, the churches/charities will be motivated to tell their members/supporters about it. Also people know they would feel guilty if they denied their church or favorite charity this “free money” so that will motivate them.
What will happen when it discontinues?
Jon Palone
(UAB Recycling Coordinator) has this concern:
“When the recycle lottery is discontinued, I
foresee rates going way down. That may not be the case, perhaps you’re right
& people would get into the habit & keep it. My recommendation
would be to keep the lottery as long as possible but perhaps reduce the prizes.
If the dollar savings for disposal costs keep increasing, that may not even be
an issue.”
Ideally, the Recycle Lottery will last at least a few years. In that time, many people will go to the website (that they must go to once a year in order to double/triple their potential prize). And on that website, there would be a nice short video that shows:
· why it’s necessary that everyone recycle
· people -- whom they can easily relate to -- talking about why they recycle
· otherwise educate people that they really should recycle
People will be required to watch this video – and then answer a few easy questions about it -- in order to show they visited the website and register.
So hopefully, after that, the mindset of some people will change permanently.
How this compares to other similar programs
The Recycle Lottery is better in terms of:
· Very cheap and easy -- to start, to run, and to publicize
· Significant rewards to recyclers ($500 or even $25,000)
· Benefits to sponsors
· Encourages education
· Encourages all types of recycling
· Uses the idea that people’s need to not-lose is twice as strong as their need to win.
Comparison Chart
|
|
Recycle Lottery |
Recycle and Win |
Reverse Vending |
|
|
Recycle Lottery or |
Coke program started
in Charlotte NC in 2009 |
Coke program for
recycling cans and bottles. |
|
Website |
|
http://www.power2charlotte.com/news/'recycle-and-win'-program-now-bigger-and-better.aspx |
|
|
Brief Description |
Big prize for randomly chosen household if they’ve recycled |
Gift cards to people "caught" recycling |
People place a can or bottle into a machine. 1% win a prize. |
|
cheapest, and easiest
to start, run and publicize |
|||
|
Start up costs |
None |
Some (printing and mailing out the information and stickers) |
Lots (cost of machines) |
|
Is any equipment
required? |
No equipment required |
No equipment required |
Yes, relies on machines that must be placed in stores and maintained |
|
Yearly cost (with
the recycling rate as it is currently) |
$400 (average) |
$52,000 |
Probably lots |
|
Everyone can easily
participate from home |
Yes |
Yes. |
No |
|
Incentive for people
to encourage others to recycle |
Yes. |
No |
No |
|
Can cheaply
publicize by placing stickers on recycle bins |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Reward for Recyclers |
|||
|
Highest potential
prize per household |
$500 for regular Recycle Lottery |
$100 |
minimal |
|
Benefits to
sponsors, including gathering info |
|||
|
Incentive to visit
website that shows sponsors |
Yes. |
No |
No |
|
Incentive for people
to provide email address and mailing address |
Yes. |
No |
no |
|
Educational benefits
and other benefits |
|||
|
Incentive to visit a
website to learn about recycling |
Yes. |
No |
No |
|
Encourages all types
of recycling |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Takes advantage of
people’s need to not lose |
Yes |
No |
No |
How recycling bins could look lining the roads, advertising this….
NOTE: Bins or signs/stickers on bins are not required. Its just one of the many easy ways the Recycle Lottery could advertise itself.