GreenYes Digest V97 #92

GreenYes Mailing List and Newsgroup (greenyes@ucsd.edu)
Fri, 22 Jan 1999 16:53:46 -0500


GreenYes Digest Mon, 28 Apr 97 Volume 97 : Issue 92

Today's Topics:
EARTH DAY GRRN ACTION
new coke can
trail building with recycled products (3 msgs)

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: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 21:21:18 -0600 (MDT)
From: Eco-Cycle <ecocycle@bcn.boulder.co.us>
Subject: EARTH DAY GRRN ACTION

I hope all you folks who did an Earth Day action on Coke, or know of one,
will post it to GreenYes so that our friends at Coke who are monitoring
this listserve can see how popular their company has become in such a
short time. This is just the beginning of the new age of
Cyber-Organizing, and any of you net-wizards out there with great ideas on
perfecting the art should let us all know about it.

For my part here in Boulder, on the evening of April 22 EcoCycle held our
annual Volunteer Appreciation Dinner and Earth Day Dance. We had a
sell-out, serving over 400 dinners, and from the stage I shaped my speech
around the Coke action and the creation of the GRRN. Throughout the
audience, EcoCycle staff circulated the Coke petition.

The response was very favorable, and it confirmed my belief that in a
significant portion of the population lies a deep frustration with the
power and arrogance of large corporations. Although I stressed that the
GRRN had not called a boycott yet, many people approached me throughout
the evening and stated their intent to boycott Coke.

EcoCycle will continue the Coke Public Awareness Campaign until they
decide to call the GRRN and respond with a sincere plan to improve their
business practices around recycling, labeling, refillables and deposit
programs.

Look forward to hearing from more of you! Eric Lombardi, Exec. Dir.


------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 17:31:12 -0600
From: swally@earthlink.net (Wally)
Subject: new coke can

Coke throws environment out the window again, with the extra fuel to
transport the heavier can, and more aluminum wasted. This new ribbed can
would also take more force to crush the can.

>As if the existing issues addressed by GRN weren't sufficient, Coke is now
>piloting a new ribbed can that uses 20% more aluminum, all in the name of
>marketing. One spokesperson said gleefully that it now takes fewer cans to
>make a pound of aluminum for recycling. So much for waste prevention.
>
>David Stitzhal, MRP
>President
>Full Circle Environmental, Inc.
>8355 Wolcott Avenue South
>Seattle, WA 98118
>206-723-0528
>206-723-2452 fax
>Fullcirc@halcyon.com

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 09:30:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ann Schneider <aschneid@cats.ucsc.edu>
Subject: trail building with recycled products

While I am no great fan of plastics I do believe that their are certain
applications where plastic is the better choice. For example plastic
lumber pilings for wharfs and other structures built in water. The
plastic lumber does not have to be treated with chemicals that cause
massive problems in marine life. A second application in trails can be
for boardwalks. We are looking at plastic boardwalks for a nature
reserve we are creating on former Fort Ord Army base in Monterey. The
plastic lumber should hold up alot better in the marine air environment.

Ann Schneider
aschneid@cats.ucsc.edu

On
Thu, 24 Apr 1997, ZERO WASTE AMERICA, Inc. wrote:

> Inga: Trails should be made from natural, organic, non-toxic substances
that will do no harm. Some of the items on your list, particularly plastic,
are not natural or safe.
>
> Lynn Landes
> www.ZeroWasteAmerica.com
>
> ----------
> From: Bob Harsell[SMTP:riverboy@injersey.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 1997 1:54 PM
> To: Inga VanNynatten
> Cc: greenyes@UCSD.Edu
> Subject: Re: trail building with recycled products
>
> Inga VanNynatten wrote:
> >
> > Greetings!
> >
> > I am looking for case studies of trails built with recycled products.
> > If you know of any trails in your area, please contact me. Information
> > on product cost, durability, appearance, and site suitability would also be
> > most appreciated.
> >
> > Example products could include:
> > glass cullet
> > glassphalt
> > recycled asphalt product (RAP)
> > recrushed cement
> > plastic lumber
> > compacted flyash
> > china or porcelain
> > any other innovative re-use of resources to build trails and\or trails
> > ammenities.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Inga VanNynatten
> > Intern, NPS-Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program
> > 512-339-9679
>
> Dear Inga,
> The greenway and trails movement has consequences resembling
> those of urban sprawl. People continually "move further out" to escape
> conditions they have helped to create but are loath to correct. Often,
> simply because they are derelict and unnoticed, certain small areas that
> remain, in otherwise suburbia or sprawl, are suddenly noticed by somebody
> and consequently loved to death with trails.
> Who suffers? The wildlife. Most wildlife does not want to buddy
> up with humans. The greenway and trail movement is further intrusion on
> what little space we have left for them.
> The introduction of the recycled materials you mentioned into the
> last refuge of urban wildlife is a step that should be considered from
> the point of view of wildlife.
> Bob Harsell, Director,
> Arthur Kill Watershed Association
>
>
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 19:18:04 -0400
From: "ZERO WASTE AMERICA, Inc." <lynnlandes@earthlink.net>
Subject: trail building with recycled products

------ =_NextPart_000_01BC533F.C1BC00E0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Although the following article is about degradable plastics, it speaks =
about some of the harmful ingredients of plastics and the dust, or =
residue, they can create over time. This concerns me.=20

http://www.edf.org/pubs/EDF-Letter/1990/Jan/l_shopbag.html

=20

Lynn Landes
www.ZeroWasteAmerica.com

----------
From: Ann Schneider[SMTP:aschneid@cats.ucsc.edu]
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 1997 5:30 AM
To: ZERO WASTE AMERICA, Inc.
Cc: Inga VanNynatten; 'Bob Harsell'; greenyes@UCSD.Edu
Subject: RE: trail building with recycled products

While I am no great fan of plastics I do believe that their are certain=20
applications where plastic is the better choice. For example plastic=20
lumber pilings for wharfs and other structures built in water. The=20
plastic lumber does not have to be treated with chemicals that cause=20
massive problems in marine life. A second application in trails can be=20
for boardwalks. We are looking at plastic boardwalks for a nature=20
reserve we are creating on former Fort Ord Army base in Monterey. The=20
plastic lumber should hold up alot better in the marine air environment.

Ann Schneider
aschneid@cats.ucsc.edu

On=20
Thu, 24 Apr 1997, ZERO WASTE AMERICA, Inc. wrote:

> Inga: Trails should be made from natural, organic, non-toxic =
substances that will do no harm. Some of the items on your list, =
particularly plastic, are not natural or safe.=20
>=20
> Lynn Landes
> www.ZeroWasteAmerica.com
>=20
> ----------
> From: Bob Harsell[SMTP:riverboy@injersey.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 1997 1:54 PM
> To: Inga VanNynatten
> Cc: greenyes@UCSD.Edu
> Subject: Re: trail building with recycled products
>=20
> Inga VanNynatten wrote:
> >=20
> > Greetings!
> >=20
> > I am looking for case studies of trails built with recycled =
products.
> > If you know of any trails in your area, please contact me. =
Information
> > on product cost, durability, appearance, and site suitability would =
also be
> > most appreciated.
> >=20
> > Example products could include:
> > glass cullet
> > glassphalt
> > recycled asphalt product (RAP)
> > recrushed cement
> > plastic lumber
> > compacted flyash
> > china or porcelain
> > any other innovative re-use of resources to build trails and\or =
trails
> > ammenities.
> >=20
> > Thanks!
> >=20
> > Inga VanNynatten
> > Intern, NPS-Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program
> > 512-339-9679
>=20
> Dear Inga,=09
> The greenway and trails movement has consequences resembling=20
> those of urban sprawl. People continually "move further out" to escape =

> conditions they have helped to create but are loath to correct. Often, =

> simply because they are derelict and unnoticed, certain small areas =
that=20
> remain, in otherwise suburbia or sprawl, are suddenly noticed by =
somebody=20
> and consequently loved to death with trails.=20
> Who suffers? The wildlife. Most wildlife does not want to buddy=20
> up with humans. The greenway and trail movement is further intrusion =
on=20
> what little space we have left for them.
> The introduction of the recycled materials you mentioned into the=20
> last refuge of urban wildlife is a step that should be considered from =

> the point of view of wildlife.
> Bob Harsell, Director,
> Arthur Kill Watershed Association
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20

------ =_NextPart_000_01BC533F.C1BC00E0
Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Shortcut to Degradable
Plastics Right Question Wrong Answer.URL"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

W0ludGVybmV0U2hvcnRjdXRdClVSTD1odHRwOi8vd3d3LmVkZi5vcmcvcHVicy9FREYtTGV0dGVy
LzE5OTAvSmFuL2xfc2hvcGJhZy5odG1sAAAA

------ =_NextPart_000_01BC533F.C1BC00E0--

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 22:58:01 -0500
From: Jim McNelly <compost@cloudnet.com>
Subject: trail building with recycled products

ZERO WASTE AMERICA, Inc. wrote:
>
> Although the following article is about degradable plastics, it speaks
about some of the harmful ingredients of plastics and the dust, or residue,
they can create over time. This concerns me.
>
> http://www.edf.org/pubs/EDF-Letter/1990/Jan/l_shopbag.html
>
>
>
Hi Lynn,

I read the above mentioned article and wish to make the following
comments. When the article was written, in 1990, nearly all the so
called degradable plastics were ordinary LDPE plastics with starch
binders. As the article pointed out, the plastics only reduced into
ever smaller pieces, or what is often referred to as ERPS, ever reducing
particle size. Smaller does not equate to degradable, although many
shredding systems manufacturers would have us believe otherwise. The
degradable plastics of that era were largely a hoax; a green skinned
scam on the part of mega corn producers to create a new market for corn
products preying upon the sensitivities of environmentalists.

My point is that degradable plastics have come a long way since 1990,
and there are new generations on the market that do truly degrade in the
composting process into harmless organic byproducts such as carbon
dioxide and humus. A misperception of degradable plastics in 1990 was
that they would reduce litter and decrease the volume of material in
landfills. None of the current manufacturers I have made contact with
make such dubious claims. The current claims are that these plastics
degrade in the composting process such that they do not need to be
removed before hand or that they become a nuisance or contaminant in the
finished compost.

New generations of degradable bags are being used for collection of
leaves and grass clippings and allowed to commingle with the material as
it goes into the compost piles. As such, they are just as degradable as
are paper bags. New products on the market include cutlery, straws,
cups, lids and plates. If they were widely used in cafeterias and
restaurants, post consumer food products could be composted more
readily.

I also noted that the article was an official publication from the
Environmental Defense Fund, a group that has not been very favorable to
the composting industry. EDF resisted the development of the Source
Separated Composting Association in 1992, took a hostile position on the
issue of composting paper, even non-recyclable paper, and outraged many
environmental minded composters with their shameful national
advertisment making a mockery of earthworm growers with the final insult
"This is not the way to recycle".

A more current analysis of the degradability issue would be more
appropriate in 1997 and sources other than EDF on the issue of
composting and degradability would have more credibility.

Jim~ McNelly Compost@cloudnet.com
NaturTech Composting Systems, Inc. 320-253-6255
Information on Composting and Sustainable Futures
The Humusphere HTTP://www.composter.com

------------------------------

End of GreenYes Digest V97 #92
******************************