One thing Lewiston and Auburn could — and should — do together would be increasing their meager recycling rates.

Auburn City Manager Glenn Aho sent an encouraging signal Feb. 9 that he’s willing to at least explore single-stream recycling, something the town’s Waste Management Committee, and this newspaper, have been promoting for several years.

Single-stream makes recycling much easier by allowing residents to dump all their recyclables into a single bin which they leave at the curb. The material is then sorted and separated by machine either here or at an established recycling center in Portland.

The latest state figures (2008), show Auburn with a 25.5 percent recycling rate and Lewiston at 26.8 percent.

While many of the small communities in the Sun Journal’s three-county region are in the 25-30 percent range, there are exceptions. Farmington is at 55.9 percent, Norway is 53.3 and Mechanic Falls shows a remarkable 64.8 percent rate — more than twice L-A’s.

Single-stream would certainly help, but it should be accompanied by a pay-per-bag system that would give residents real incentive to recycle and establish other eco-friendly habits like composting.

If that sounds radical, consider this: 150 communities in Maine, including Portland, have successfully implemented pay-per-bag.

Now, the average Portland resident discards 17 ounces of trash per day, compared to 32 ounces per day in Lewiston and 33 in Auburn.

In a very similar urban environment, Portland residents produce half as much personal trash as we do. That’s embarrassing.

Other pay-per-bag communities include Bath, Brunswick (which doubled its recycling rate to 66 percent when it went pay-for-bag), Cumberland, Falmouth and Topsham.

Mechanic Falls has the highest recycling rate in the tri-county area, and there’s a reason. Residents there are required to use clear bags and to separate their waste at the transfer station.  An attendant quickly examines the bags to make sure they do not contain recyclables.

There will be some push-back to paying for garbage bags, with residents arguing that they would be paying for a service they formerly received for “free.”

That criticism could easily be answered by reducing property taxes slightly to offset the additional expense.

In any event, we are happy that Auburn is looking at better recycling options. There could be economies of scale if the two communities, and perhaps even surrounding towns, worked together.

But if that’s not possible, we encourage Auburn to move forward and lead the way.

[email protected]