GreenYes Digest V97 #1

GreenYes Mailing List and Newsgroup (greenyes@UCSD.EDU)
Fri, 22 Jan 1999 17:02:25 -0500

GreenYes Digest Thu, 9 Jan 97 Volume 97 : Issue 1

Today's Topics:
Als folly
Mining Law Reform Letter
WW Paper: Subsidies, Politics and the Environment

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

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:37:04 +1100
From: "PJ Prete" <>

Forwarding this position announcement to the list for anyone that may
be interested. I just received the posting today, so I'm not sure
about the deadline!

------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:26:35 -0100 (GMT+1)

The Rhode Island Resource Recovery Corp, a quasi-public
instrumentality of the Statewhich provides solid waste disposal and recycling
services to the State, will be hiring a Waste Reduction Specialist to
develop, implement and coordinate source reduction, waste reduction and
composting programs. BA/BS and 2 years experience. Salary $26K-$31K.
Deadline Jan 3rd. For details, e-mail me or you can look up the classified
ad at

Happy New Year!

Nancy J. Hawksley, Recycling Coordinator
Housing and Residential Life
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
401-874-2840 phone
401-874-2850 fax

Philip J. Prete
North Carolina Div. of Waste Management
(919) 733-0692 ext 252


Date: Tue, 07 Jan 97 00:35:27 PST
Subject: Als folly


As part of the "Reinventing Government" activitie
s of the Vice President, a
Dec. 31, 1996 Federal Register notice would withdraw a section of EPA
regulation that would require federal government agencies to impose a
refundable deposit on beverages sold at federal facilities.

I paraphrase a section of the notice:
"On September 21, 1978, EPA issued guidelines for reducing beverage
container waste. The Guidelines, published in 40 CFR Part 244, were
mandatory for Federal facilities and recommended for adoption by state and
local governments and private agencies. These guidelines were intended to
achieve a reduction in beverage container solid waste and litter, resulting
in savings and waste collection and disposal costs in the Federal
government. The guidelines would achieve their goals by making all beverage
containers on Federal facilities returnable and by encouraging reuse or
recycling of the containers. To accomplish the return of the containers, a
deposit of at least 5 cents on each returnable beverage container was to be
paid upon purchase and refunded to the consumer."

The notice goes on to say that "since then, Federal agencies have met the
challenge of recycling by implementing in-house or by contract, programs for
the collection of a number of recyclable materials, including beverage
containers". In fact, while there are often collection containers in
Federal buildings, there is rarely any education or other incentive to USE
these containers. The cans often go into the trash.

The FR notice states "The (Federal rules) have been superseded by such
Presidential actions as Executive Order 12873, Federal Acquisition,
recycling and Waste Prevention. Deleting these guidelines from the CFR will
have no measurable impact on solid waste management" Later is says: "With
the implementation of RCRA Section 6001, E.O. 12873, and state and local
recycling collection mandates and programs, there is no longer a need for
separate guidelines for Federal facilities on beverage containers. Indeed,
these other requirements establish a more comprehensive and integrated
recycling program. Therefore, EPA is withdrawing 40 CFR Part 244."

DATES: This final rule will be effective on March 3, 1997, unless EPA
receives advance comments on the accompanying proposal within January 30,
1997. If such adverse comment is received, EPA will withdraw this direct
final rule, and provide timely notice in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments (one original and two copies) should reference
docket number F-96-MRBF-FFFFF and be addressed to: RCRA Docket and
Information Center (RIC), Office of Solid Waste (5305W), U.S. EPA; 401 M
Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.

The Clinton Administration should be enforcing laws like Part 244 requiring
a bottle bill, a proven success, and not going backward in this manner. It
has been shown in several studies that curbside programs do not conflict
with a bottle bill. Curbside is incomplete (many areas don't have them,
they don't address litter) and a bottle bill will complement it. For
further background on the bottle bill, contact the Container Recycling
Institute, 1400 16th Street, NW, Suite 250, Washington, DC 20036 tel 202-797-

Roger Diedrich


Date: Mon, 06 Jan 97 23:02:36 PST


Bottle Bills will be the subject of Talking Green, a segment of
the National Public Radio show, The Environment,to be taped later
this week. You can ask a question of the panelists by
calling Stephanie Goichman at 1-800-323-9262 ext 182 any
time TUESDAY or WEDNESDAY. The host is Peter Berke, former
president of the National Audubon Society.

[Forwarded from Pat Franklin, container Recycling Institute]


Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 14:06:20 -0800 (PST)
From: "David A. Kirkpatrick" <>
Subject: Mining Law Reform Letter

Grassroots Recyclers -

I am forwarding this letter, since reform of the 1872 Mining
Law would mean that recovered materials would become more
cost-competitive with mined virgin materials.

David Kirkpatrick


Because of your overwhelming support of this letter so far, and because
we know that it's been hard for some of you to get your group's approval
over the holidays, we are extending the deadline for the following letter
until close of business Monday, January 6.

If your group has not already signed on, send your groups' name and address
and a contact person to:


Roger Featherstone
Director, GREEN



Dear Activist,

It's time to start one last sign-on letter this year. President Clinton
needs to be reminded of his promise to reform the 1872 Mining Law.
Please read the following sign-on letter to President Clinton and sign
up your group. It might be more difficult over the holidays to "work
your channels to sign on to this letter, but mining reform is of
critical importance to wildlife and public lands so please make the

The deadline for the letter is December 31.

To sign on send your groups' name and address and a contact person

For more information call the Mineral Policy Center at: (202)887-1872
or e-mail


The President
The White House Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

Last summer you took a bold step to protect the environment of
Yellowstone National Park, by stopping the "New World" gold mine near
Cooke City, Montana. We thank you for that action.

You said then that we needed to move on from that one mine to the
broader job of completely overhauling the 1872 Mining Law -- the law
that made the New World mine's threat possible in the first place. We

Proper reform of the 1872 Mining Law has to be COMPREHENSIVE, as
your Administration has said in the past. Reform must include rules to
prevent environmental damage at new mines. It must create a funded
program to clean up the massive pollution problems that mining has
caused in the past. And, it must make mining companies pay a fair
royalty for the ores they take from public lands, and permanently end
the pernicious "patenting" system that sells rich public lands to mining
corporations for $5.00 per acre.

You were bold at Yellowstone. Now, as you shape the priorities
and the budget that your Administration will pursue with the 105th
Congress, we urge you to be just as bold with your campaign for 1872
Mining Law Reform. We urge you to make this a White House-directed
campaign. We call on you to ensure that all aspects of COMPREHENSIVE
reform are adopted.

It's critically important that you stake out a strong position on
this issue NOW, at the beginning of your second term, and not wait.

Thank you for your attention. Our organizations are eager to work
together with you to complete this important environmental reform.



The 1872 Mining Law is the worst giveaway of our public lands and
environment in the country. The Mining Law, which was passed 124 years
ago, lets big mining corporations:

o Have a "right to mine" wherever they find valuable minerals
on the lands all Americans own in the West;

o Take over $2 billion in gold, silver, platinum, and other
precious ores from public lands each year for free; and

o Leave massive water pollution and destroyed landscapes
behind them, including over 10,000 miles of contaminated
rivers and streams across the country.

President Clinton stopped one dangerous gold mine last summer,
when he went to Yellowstone National Park to block the "New World" mine.
Noranda, a Canadian company, had planned to dig the mine two miles from
the Park boundary, in sensitive grizzly bear habitat. Clinton said at
Yellowstone that the next step after stopping that mine was permanent
reform of the 1872 Mining Law.

Environmentalists have been working to end the 1872 Mining Law's
damage. However, the mining industry's lobbyists and campaign
contributions have blocked reform so far. Now, we hope that the
President's involvement and the nationwide pressure on Congress to end
"corporate welfare" will add up to a winning combination. We need your
help on the enclosed letter to press the President to move forward with
comprehensive reform -- a reform package that will repair both the
financial and the environmental problems with the Mining Law.

It's very important that we let the President know NOW that he
should commit to a strong position at the start of his second term.

Thanks for your help, and HAPPY HOLIDAYS!
GrassRoots Environmental Effectiveness Network
A project of Defenders of Wildlife
1101 14th St. NW, Suite 1400, Washington, DC 20005
(202) 682-9400 x290 fax:(202) 682-1331 e-mail:
check out our web page at:
For correspondence regarding our listserve and GREENLines
contact: (NOT

To subscribe to our listserve Actgreen:
one line message to
subscribe actgreen Your Name


Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 15:23:08 -0800 (PST)
From: "David A. Kirkpatrick" <>
Subject: WW Paper: Subsidies, Politics and the Environment

The recent Worldwatch Paper 133 "Paying the Piper: Subsidies, Politics and
the Environment" has just come out. It documents the many ways in which
governments around the world subsidize environmentally destructive
practices. The paper puts the virgin materials and waste disposal subsidies
which recyclers contend with in a much broader perspective. A few short

"Around the world, governments offer myriad subsidies for activities that
end up harming the environment and wasting money, thus weakening economies....

Worldwide, government policies shunt at least $500 billion a year toward
activities, that harm the envi4onment, from overfishing to driving cars and
trucks. The full amount may be far greater...

An enumeration of the side effects of all these subsidies virtually catalogs
today's environmental problems. Subsidies for logging and mining accelerate
forest degradation and water pollution. Those for coal production directly
add to local problems such as land disturbance and water pollution while
contributing on a global scale to atmospheric concentrations of
heat-trapping carbon dioxide. Agricultural subsidies in industrial
countries have been found to correlate with higher rates of pesticide and
fertilizer use, thus increasing water pollution and soil degradation. The
list of adverse effects of subsidies continues on, from smog to nuclear
waste generation. ...

The greatest challenge for reformers may not be figuring out what reform
should look like, but making it a political reality. The direct
beneficiaries of environmentally harmful subsidies, such as middle-class
buyers of cheap electricity or investors and workers in resource- based
industries, often have more legal recognition, are better organized and
financed, or are collectively more self-aware than those harmed who may
include low-income or indigenous people, city dwellers who cannot tell what
is in the air they breathe or where it comes from, generations yet unborn
and, of course, general taxpayers. As a result, subsidy recipients are more
adept at exploiting avenues of political influence such as public protests,
campaign contributions, family connections, and even corruption in order to
thwart change. Subsidy reform, then, and more generally, continuing
progress toward environmental sustainability, are bound up with the broader
task of making government more equally accountable to all the governed....

To obtain a copy of this or other Worldwatch publications, contact them at:
Worldwatch Institute
1776 Mass. Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20036-1904 USA


End of GreenYes Digest V97 #1