Mayor Mufi Hannemann's State of the City address hit the nitty-gritty basics crucial to the city's operation, from enhancing police and fire services to getting rid of potholes to dealing with O'ahu's antiquated sewer system. And that's all good.

The most encouraging ideas in the mayor's yearly address centered on the ever-present "sustainability" theme (also the current buzzword at the state Capitol), encompassing stewardship of our environment. His plan to bring more energy-efficient systems into city buildings, expand the use of biodiesel in the vehicle fleet and to encourage a pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly environment within transit-oriented development is on the mark.

But the jewel of his sustainability plan is clear: curbside recycling.

Early details of the mayor's curbside plan are sensible. It would begin with community meetings in April and May to collect input on how and where to launch the service. The city would pilot a curbside program in limited areas. And though no details are set in stone, among the communities up for discussion are Windward O'ahu (where homeowners already have the blue bins), Mililani (where it's been tested in the past) and Hawai'i Kai.

One option would be to have once-weekly curbside pickup of regular trash and once-weekly curbside greenwaste and mixed recyclables collection. If once-a-week trash collection isn't enough, homeowners could receive a second pickup for a monthly fee of $10. Monthly bulky-item pickup would remain the same.

It's true that Honolulu — unlike most cities across the nation — has enjoyed free receptacles and twice-weekly trash collection, as well as free greenwaste and monthly bulky-item pickup. That might have to change.

The compromise of reducing one regular trash pickup to make way for weekly curbside recycling collection makes sense. The hope is that by recycling, regular waste will be reduced enough to sustain once-weekly collection.

It will require personal commitment from all of us to make this work.

As the mayor said, "The result will be a stronger conservation ethic and a cleaner environment."

Who can argue with those results?