It’s mind over mattress with more regulations

April 9, 2013

By Katy Grimes

nothingreally

As if manufacturers need any more California regulations to contend with, a new bill would require mattress manufacturers to organize, operate and pay for all mattress recycling in the state.

But it’s already illegal to dump a mattress, isn’t it? Yes it is.

There actually are two mattress bills moving through the Legislature right now. SB 254 by Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley, would mandate mattress manufacturers to pay the entire cost of mattress recycling — a cost which would undoubtedly be tacked on to the price of a new mattress. Hancock’s bill would not specify how this recycling would take place, leaving many to assume Californians would still see abandoned old mattresses lining city streets.

The cost of Hancock’s bill is estimated to be at least $24 per mattress.

The other bill, SB 245, is a far more creative and non-government, long-term solution. It would require the creation of a non-profit organization, which would operate a new mattress recycling program.

SB 245 by Sen. Lou Correa, D- Santa Ana, would set far more realistic and attainable goals, and create a sustainable funding source for this nonprofit.

SB 245 kills two birds with one stone: The fee to the consumer, about $5, would be less than if Hancock’s bill is passed; and there would be an organized, statewide non-profit organization to manage the mattress recycling.

State legislators usually create bills looking for a problem, but Correa’s bill actually appears to be a bill addressing a big problem in the state — at least if it is a problem, according to Hancock.

Nothing really mattress 

Christopher Hudgins, with the International Sleep Products Association, said in an interview there are several issues with old mattresses, besides the unsightly abandoned mattress street litter in some areas of the state. Faced with Hancock’s bill and a potential mandate, his association worked up an alternative solution.

Many mattress manufacturers already recycle old mattresses — the materials are highly recyclable.  But it is expensive and labor-intensive, according to Hudgins. And some mattress manufacturers say they recycle the old mattresses, not by destroying them, but by selling them to a third party for refurbishment and eventual resale. The problem is, the old mattresses aren’t always refurbished.

In 2008, NBC Dateline did an investigation on reconditioned, resale mattresses. In what originally sounded like a real sleeper of a story, Dateline found that some mattresses which were supposed to be stripped, sterilized, re-covered and resold, had a host of surprises inside.

“Beneath new covers, filthy old materials were contaminated with urine, fecal matter and dangerous fungi, all of which can seep out through the cover over time,” Dateline reported. “We also found a dead bedbug with its eggs.”

Sleepy mattress sales are a thing of the past

“The International Sleep Products Association’s ‘Bedding Barometer’ reports wholesale mattress sales in the U.S. were up 11.7 percent last year, compared to 2011, while year-to-date unit shipments increased by 7.6 percent,” MSN Money recently reported.

IBISWorld says the mattress industry had $7 billion in revenues last year, due to increased demand and recovering housing market. “Mattress manufacturers can rest easy, because a recovery is on the way.”

If enacted, SB 245 would create a non-profit mattress recycling organization made up of retailers and manufacturers whose duty would be to plan, implement, and administer a state system to collect discarded used mattresses, dismantle them and recycle their materials for use in new products.

So what’s the problem?

Cot in a landslide

Hancock’s bill would make mattress manufacturers legally and financially responsible for illegal dumping.

According to Hancock, there is currently no law addressing the problem of illegally dumped mattresses. “Illegally dumped mattresses are a terrible blight on our communities,” Hancock said in a press release.  “They not only deface a neighborhood but they can become a health hazard and a breeding ground for mold and pests. Cash-strapped cities are forced to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars collecting and disposing of abandoned mattresses.  That’s money that could be better spent on police and other vital services for the community.”

SB 254 would require mattress manufacturers to submit a recovery and recycling plan to CalRecycle by April 1, 2015. Consistent with existing state policy, the plans would have a goal of recycling at least 75 percent of used mattresses in California by January 1, 2020.

Hancock’s SB 254, by mandating mattress manufacturers to be responsible for recycling old mattresses, has the potential to threaten jobs with the government mandate on manufacturers.

But why is the illegal dumping of old mattresses the responsibility of manufacturers? Old abandoned cars are not the responsibility of General Motors.

tumblr_m87gs4Qrpd1rrl3q9o1_500

Mind over mattress

Correa’s bill, SB 245, creates a recycling solution to an existing problem, without threatening  manufacturing jobs in the mattress industry. And, the bill uses a non-government solution to do this.

Adding another fee to consumers is rarely a good option. But faced with the Democratic supermajority in California, which prefers to impose mandates, regulations and additional costs on private sector businesses, SB 245 could be a win-win, without actually costing Californians much more at the checkout.

Correa says the bill will not only clean up the “blight of illegally dumped mattresses in our neighborhoods and along our roads,” but it will also create a solution that is “good for the environment, California consumers and industry.”

10 comments

Write a comment
  1. jimmydeeoc
    jimmydeeoc 9 April, 2013, 10:26

    “….Old abandoned cars are not the responsibility of General Motors……”

    Yet.

    Don’t give Hancock any ideas, Katy.

    Reply this comment
  2. Hondo
    Hondo 9 April, 2013, 10:49

    As a landlord, old abandoned couches and mattresses are a HUGE issue for us. Hide-a-beds should be made a felony to posses. There have been more thrown out backs, blown hernias and ripped up fingers because of hide-a-beds, than you can imagine.
    Couches and mattresses don’t fit in any dumpster and the garbage companies charge idiotic amounts of money to haul them off. Me and my boss ‘dissmantle’ couches and mattresses and put the remains in the dumpster in pieces. Dissmantling means taking utility knives, hammers and plyers and saws to the articles. An hour for each couch and mattress is average, along with pinched and cut fingers and a whole lotta cussing. And when it rains or snows on them, it increases the weight and smell of the article, exponantially.
    I guess we landlords should charge a deposit for every couch and mattress when they move in. That would be the best solution.
    Hondo….

    Reply this comment
  3. us citizen
    us citizen 9 April, 2013, 12:47

    This wont cost $5 or even $24 for the consumer! It will go up and up…..just like the smog tests have.

    Reply this comment
  4. Sean Morham
    Sean Morham 9 April, 2013, 13:53

    Will a mattress purchase require a background check and registry? Seems like a state department in waiting, job growth for the economy, nice benefits…This could be regulated with exemptions, free mattresses for the “undocumented.”

    Reply this comment
  5. us citizen
    us citizen 9 April, 2013, 17:27

    LOL

    Reply this comment
  6. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 9 April, 2013, 20:17

    We love mattresses. Expensive to pack and ship.

    Reply this comment
  7. Bill - San Jose
    Bill - San Jose 10 April, 2013, 08:00

    Say goodbye to Simmons up near Oakland. Huge manufacturer but their loyalty to this area (dating back to the 1800s by the way) will be shortlived with this type of taxation for selling a product that 99% of folks need.

    And what if you bring your mattresses from out of state and abandon them? Who pays that?

    Put the onus on the persons renting from you and require a deposit. Hondo is right.

    Reply this comment
  8. John Galt
    John Galt 11 April, 2013, 16:17

    Should recycling be required, let existing tire recyclers have a shot at the business…why create a new “one trick pony” quasi-government organization when so many have already been created politically to “solve” other waste problems (e.g., tire recyclers, motor oil recyclers, restaurant grease recyclers, alum. soda can recyclers, etc). One can only dream of how relaxed we would be if “Silent Spring” had never been written.

    Reply this comment
  9. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 11 April, 2013, 22:54

    Earth Day did you in doomers. Watching all those little kids cleaning up beaches and parks is so feel good!

    Reply this comment
  10. richard meyer
    richard meyer 19 August, 2015, 11:18

    Recycling must be required for the modern city. International Sleep Products Association take wrong decision about this matter.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply



Related Articles

Tech giants back privacy bill

Bolstered by crucial support from industry leaders and Republicans across the aisle, Sacramento’s most prominent privacy-rights proponent took another stab

Cap & Trade parasite bill signals civil war on business

May 31, 2012 By Wayne Lusvardi Speaker John A. Perez’s push of Assembly Bill 1532 through the State Assembly on

Debate on lead ammo ban defies political stereotypes

  A bill to ban lead ammunition in California has sparked a heated debate among environmentalists, conservationists, hunters and sportsmen.