(no subject)

hNhNmNrecycle@envirolink.org (bob@earthsystems.org)
Fri, 22 Jan 1999 16:12:38 -0500

The MIT Press is pleased to announce the publication of the Journal of
Industrial Ecology, an international, multi-disciplinary quarterly designed
to foster both understanding and practice in the emerging field of
industrial ecology. The Journal will be owned by Yale University, edited at
the Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, and
published by The MIT Press.

Premiering with its first issue in spring 1997, Journal of Industrial
Ecology is open to and encourages submissions that are interdisciplinary in
approach. In addition to more formal academic papers, the journal seeks to
provide a forum for continuing exchange of information and opinions through
contributions from scholars, environmental managers, policymakers, advocates
and others involved in environmental science, management and policy. Topics
addressed by the journal include:

* material and energy flows studies ("industrial metabolism")
* technological change
* dematerialization and decarbonization
* life cycle planning, design and assessment
* design for the environment
* extended producer responsibility ("product stewardship")
* eco-industrial parks ("industrial symbiosis")
* product-oriented environmental policy
* eco-efficiency.

For complete instructions for authors, as well as additional information on
the journal, consult the Journal of Industrial Ecology page at the MIT Press
Journals web site:


Eric Maki v 617-253-2866
The MIT Press Journals f 617-258-5028
55 Hayward St., Cambridge, MA 02142 emaki@mit.edu

Return-Path: root@UCSD.EDU
Received: from UCSD.EDU (mailbox2.ucsd.edu []) by igc7.igc.org
(8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA12141; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 05:31:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.ucsd.edu (mail.ucsd.edu []) by UCSD.EDU
(8.8.2/8.6.9) with SMTP id EAA27828 for <greenyes-ddist@mailbox.ucsd.edu>;
Thu, 14 Nov 1996 04:30:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail.ucsd.edu; id EAA29402
sendmail 8.6.12/UCSD-2.2-sun
Thu, 14 Nov 1996 04:30:12 -0800 for greenyes-ddist
Message-Id: <199611141230.EAA29402@mail.ucsd.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 96 04:30:05 PST
From: GreenYes Mailing List and Newsgroup <greenyes@UCSD.EDU>
Errors-To: Owner-GreenYes@UCSD.EDU
Reply-To: GreenYes@UCSD.EDU
Precedence: List
Subject: GreenYes Digest V96 #21
To: GreenYes@UCSD.EDU

GreenYes Digest Thu, 14 Nov 96 Volume 96 : Issue 21

Today's Topics:
Addendum to Buy Nothing Day
Comments on draft policy statement for Zero Waste

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <greenyes@UCSD.Edu>
Send subscription requests to: <greenyes-Digest-Request@UCSD.Edu>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to postmaster@ucsd.edu.

Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 15:51:52 -0500
From: <B.Schaefer@facilities.utoronto.ca>
Subject: Addendum to Buy Nothing Day


Many people have commented that the gesture of Buy Nothing Day is
either futile because it changes nothing, or "Scrooge-like" because it
is one of the biggest pre-Christmas shopping days in the U.S. Might I
suggest that Christmas shoppers consider giving an experience instead
of a gift. Examples are: theatre tickets, massage, movie,
facial/pedicure/manicure, ski trip (I wish!).

Your time and attention given as a gift may be worth more than yet
another unnecessary consumer item. (Just a thought).

Barbara Schaefer, Recycling Coordinator
University of Toronto
6th floor, 215 Huron Street
Toronto, Ont. M5S 1A1 CANADA
phone (416) 978-7080 "The battle for Nature
fax (416) 971-2994 is a battle against
e-mail b.schaefer@facilities.utoronto.ca ourselves."


Date: 13 Nov 96 16:21:40
From: Richard Kashmanian <Kashmanian.Richard@epamail.epa.gov>
Subject: Comments on draft policy statement for Zero Waste

Thanks for asking for comments on the draft policy statement for Zero
Waste. I've read through the comments posted thus far and have some additional
comments to offer.

1. Waste prevention should include composting and recycling, rather than
exclude them.

It seems that a number of source reduction advocates want to position
composting and recycling as methods of "disposal" or methods to handle
"waste." Referring to source reduction as "waste prevention" (or "waste
reduction") implies that compost and recycling feedstocks are "waste." I view
these as the by-products of landscaping or consumption. Waste prevention and
waste reduction should include composting and recycling. Otherwise, this
becomes problematic to the compost and recycling industries for a number of
reasons -- e.g., economic impacts (e.g., processing costs and product
revenues), product market development, effectiveness of source separation, and
regulatory burdens. Furthermore, the draft policy statement refers to the
"disposal marketplace," "Discards are ... subject to disposal," and "Disposal
includes any method of reuse, recycling, composting, or wasting." By referring
to all of these management methods as "disposal," there is no distinction
between conservation/recovery and burying. I hope I am not the only one
troubled by this choice of words coming from supporters of source reduction,
composting, and recycling.

2. Source separated compost and recycling feedstocks should not be referred to
as "discards".

I believe it is much wiser to share the perspective that the generators of
these used materials have become part of the industrial process -- they are
input suppliers. If we use words such as "discards" to describe these
materials, we imply that the generators are getting rid of these materials and
that the materials have no value. I contend these generators believe that they
are passing these materials along in a production chain. The public already
believes that if they source separate, then they are involved in recycling.
Let's continue this -- it makes no sense to jeopardize it. If we want to
convince the public that these materials have no value and that it is getting
rid of them, we should also expect that the public will mix in materials that
it believes have no value, lowering the value of the feedstocks and end
products and raising the costs of processing. Furthermore, these negative
words will also make it even harder to convince the public to buy the
value-added products made from its used materials. If we want to stress the
role of the public in the