Connecticut’s Solid Waste Crisis: Rethinking What We Throw Away
Connecticut is in the middle of a solid waste crisis, and for too long it has remained largely out of sight and out of mind.
Every year, our state generates approximately 3.5 million tons of trash, yet we only have in-state capacity to manage about 2.7 million tons. The gap is filled by shipping waste to out-of-state landfills and facilities, making Connecticut increasingly dependent on disposal options beyond our borders. The question we should all be asking is simple and urgent: What happens when those states say no more?
Our reliance on out-of-state disposal is not only risky, it is expensive and unsustainable. As regional landfill capacity shrinks and transportation costs rise, municipalities and residents will continue to see disposal costs climb. Waste does not disappear on trash day. It must go somewhere, and that “somewhere” comes with environmental and financial consequences.
Connecticut’s Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) is currently conducting a new Waste Characterization Study, the first since 2015. That last study revealed that nearly 90% of Connecticut’s waste stream could be reduced, reused, recycled, or composted. Despite this, we find ourselves facing a deepening waste crisis more than a decade later. The solution is not due to lack of opportunity. Rather, it is a lack of systemic change and sustained investment in waste reduction strategies.
The state currently operates four waste-to-energy facilities. At one point, Connecticut had six facilities and sufficient in-state capacity to manage its waste. Today, those remaining plants play a critical role, but they are not a long-term solution on their own. If Connecticut is unwilling or unable to build new disposal capacity, then we have no choice but to fundamentally rethink what we throw away and how we manage materials at the source.
At its core, waste management offers only a few options: we burn it, or we bury it. If we do not want either, then reduction must become our primary strategy. The most obvious place to start is with organic waste — particularly food scraps — which make up roughly 25% of the municipal solid waste stream. Diverting organics from disposal reduces methane emissions, extends disposal capacity, and lowers costs. Yet many communities still lack meaningful organics diversion programs.
Municipalities must begin building local waste reduction systems that emphasize source separation. These include residential and commercial organics collection, enhanced recycling programs, and expanded construction and demolition debris diversion. Communities can further strengthen these efforts by adopting or improving Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) programs. Where implemented effectively, PAYT has consistently proven to reduce trash generation while lowering disposal costs for residents.
Extended Producer Responsibility laws are another piece of the solution. These policies require manufacturers and brand owners to help manage the end-of-life costs of their products, shifting part of the burden away from municipalities and taxpayers. If producers are responsible for what happens to packaging and products after consumer use, they also have an incentive to design materials that are easier to reuse, recycle, or compost.
Local governments can also reduce costs through on-site organics management, particularly composting at transfer stations. The Housatonic Resources Recovery Authority (HRRA) provides an example of what is possible. Through Aerated Static Pile composting systems implemented in Ridgefield and Newtown, HRRA helped reduce transfer station waste by up to 40%, while also saving those towns money. These programs prove that waste reduction is not only environmentally responsible, it is fiscally smart.
However, infrastructure and policy alone are not enough. Residents must be better informed and engaged in understanding the state’s waste challenges and their role in addressing them. Education is essential to shifting behavior, improving participation, and building public support for necessary changes.
Recognizing this need, the state helped establish the RecycleCT Foundation in 2013. Officially created through Public Act 14‑94, RecycleCT is a Connecticut-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit formed to advance the state’s recycling and materials management goals. The foundation was charged with helping Connecticut increase its waste diversion rate from an estimated 35% to 60% by 2024, as outlined in the Connecticut Comprehensive Materials Management Strategy adopted by DEEP in 2016.
RecycleCT’s mission is to promote sustainable materials management through waste reduction, reuse, recycling, and composting. The organization provides statewide recycling promotion, produces educational materials that can be co-branded by municipalities and haulers, conducts research, including a recycling economic information study, and administers grant programs.
Despite the role it plays, RecycleCT continues to struggle with inadequate and unstable funding, threatening its ability to carry out its mission at the very moment Connecticut needs it most.
The bottom line is clear: Connecticut’s waste crisis will not solve itself. Communities across the state must become more engaged and ask deeper questions, not just “when is trash day?” but “where does my garbage go?” The answers matter. As disposal capacity shrinks, costs will rise, and difficult decisions will become unavoidable.
By reducing waste at the source, investing in local diversion infrastructure, holding producers accountable, and educating residents, Connecticut can move toward a more resilient and responsible materials management system. The path forward requires collective action, political will, and a willingness to change how we think about waste. If we fail to act, we will continue paying the price, financially, environmentally, and regionally for treating trash as someone else’s problem.
