GreenYes Digest V97 #224

GreenYes Mailing List and Newsgroup (
Fri, 22 Jan 1999 17:08:37 -0500

GreenYes Digest Thu, 18 Sep 97 Volume 97 : Issue 224

Today's Topics:
Agenda for the New Millennium - ASCII Text
America Recycles Day
Food Stamps for the Timber Industry
Looking for thank you cards on recycled paper (2 msgs)
Two items
What Is 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

Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 14:24:00 -0700
From: Del Norte Solid Waste Management Authority <>
Subject: Agenda for the New Millennium - ASCII Text

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Waste Busters!

Here is the ASCII version of the Agenda for the New Millennium. Hope
you can read this one. Please note my new e-mail address.

Tedd Ward

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; name="AGEND9.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="AGEND9.txt"

Agenda for the New Millennium
a policy of the California Resource Recovery Association =


As the oldest state association of professionals in reuse, repair, recyc=
ling and composting in the United States, the California Resource Recover=
y Association offers our vision of how we can move towards a more sustain=
able, resource efficient economy. We must move swiftly. Currently, alt=
hough Americans comprise only 5% of the global population, we use 30% of =
the world's resources. Equally alarming, global population doubled for t=
he first time during the last four decades, and can be expected to double=
again during the next four. Cancer cells consume and grow without limit=
; people cannot afford to do so.

Our use of materials would take less of a toll on the planet if the serv=
ice or product with the lowest price also did the least harm. We should =
not have to pay once to acquire an object, again to be rid of it, and yet=
again to cleanup the damage from the extraction and disposal. There is =
no convenient, reliable way for people to compare the environmental and s=
ocial lifecycle impacts of different products, including extraction, proc=
essing, packaging, delivery, recovery and ultimate disposal. We are work=
ing for a sustainable materials economy which treads lighter on the plane=
t, where reuse and recovery are more convenient than disposal. Our goals =

1. Zero waste. In a zero waste world, items which cannot be safely ass=
imilated into the environment simply cannot be sold, but only leased. Lo=
cal governments still collect materials to make compost, but the other ma=
terials remain the financial responsibility of those who aim to profit by=
their sale. At present, garbage is an unfunded mandate. Until the life=
cycle costs of goods are fully incorporated into the purchase price, we m=
ust lead with a label to inform citizens about the extraction and process=
ing impacts of the goods we use. =

2. End welfare for wasting. Although the adverse environmental impacts o=
f litter and even legal disposal can be significant, reducing waste throu=
gh reuse and recycling preserves the environment mainly by reducing our n=
eed to mine, log, and make new goods to replace those we failed to reuse,=
repair or recycle. Federal and State stewardship of public lands requir=
es resource policies which encourage conservation over wasting. We must =
reform both the tax and campaign finance systems, and dramatically increa=
se user fees for mineral and timber rights on public lands.

3. Jumpstart jobs with design and discards. Reuse, repair, composting and=
recycling operations generally create many more jobs for the amount of d=
iscards processed than disposal alone. Reuse businesses like tire retrea=
ders or bottle washers create more local jobs than their competing dispos=
able products. Reuse, composting and recycling conserve resources, crea=
te jobs and build communities. =

To truly improve the material efficiency of our culture and economy, ove=
r the next forty years we must change everything: how we manage our publi=
c lands; how our elected officials finance campaigns and assess taxes; ho=
w we design and manage our communities; how we design products and servic=
es; how industries and government work together to improve resource and e=
nergy efficiency; and how we define waste. We invite you to join us in =
helping to achieve this vision.

As the oldest state recycling organization in the United States,
As people devoted to salvage and recovery, =

As reusers, repairers, collectors, recyclers, composters, salvagers, p=
rocessors, brokers, and recycling-based inventors, artists, and manufactu=
As designers and craftspeople building more resource efficient communiti=
es, =

As businesses reducing wastes and buying reusable and recyclable product=
s, =

As California professionals working for governments, non-profits, and pr=
ivate enterprises dedicated to resource conservation and recovery, and
As we approach the next thousand years of human civilization, =

We are inspired to assess the progress of our material culture and chart=
a course for the future of resource conservation in California. For the =
first time in history, people over 40 in their lifetimes have witnessed a=
doubling of the global population, while the average residential space p=
er American also doubled. As global population can be expected to doubl=
e again over the next four decades, we simply cannot continue our current=
course of increasing material consumption per person in California.

To improve the inefficiency of our material economy, we must change Fede=
ral and State laws to protect our long-term interests. Federal and State =
stewardship of public lands is undermined by outdated policies which faci=
litate the extraction of the resources in the name of short term economic=
development. Under Federal and State regulations, new landfills are des=
igned to protect the water and air for thirty years, but will almost cert=
ainly leak or require repair for hundreds or thousands of years afterward=
s. Because of these political challenge of siting and the cost of constr=
ucting new landfills, we are witnessing the loss of local self-reliance =
as small local landfills are replaced by larger regional landfills. =

Local government has been given the responsibility for administering saf=
e collection and disposal, composting or recycling of all discards. So a=
lthough the legal disposal cost of many of the products collected at hous=
ehold hazardous waste collection days far exceeds the original purchase p=
rice of those products, local governments have been forced to tax the who=
le community to manage these materials. We have also witnessed a dramatic=
growth in amount of deliberately misleading information produced by and =
for the profiteers of the throwaway consumer culture. Yet the producers =
and sellers pay nothing for the services required to reuse, repair, recyc=
le, compost or safely dispose of their products and packaging, no matter =
how toxic or expensive the packaging and product residue may be. =

What have we learned? In the last ten years, research has reaffirmed ho=
w important reuse, recycling and composting are for the environment, and =
highlighted the challenges ahead. Most environmental impacts of our mate=
rial culture come from the extraction, processing, and delivery of materi=
al goods. It's as if each product casts a long shadow representing the i=
mpacts of mining, clearcutting, refining, manufacturing, and trucking. E=
nvironmentally, the problem with our material culture is not disposal, bu=
t the need to mine and make new goods to replace those we failed to reuse=
, repair or recycle. Despite being widely acknowledged as a "top priori=
ty," waste prevention remains a very small part of most municipal waste r=
eduction programs. Organic debris can be made into mulch and compost whi=
ch can increase water retention, suppress diseases, and reduce pesticide =
use in agriculture, but these benefits are only evident after several yea=
rs of continued use. Collecting mixed waste in a single truck reduces th=
e labor costs of waste collection, but often drastically reduces the valu=
e of materials which may be recovered from the waste stream. Unit pricin=
g for disposal can reduce waste, but increases reliance on other recovery=
systems. Incineration of mixed waste has nine times the negative environ=
mental impacts of recycling facilities, while competing for resources whi=
ch may otherwise be recycled. =

As citizens or businesses, almost by definition, most people don't reall=
y want to deal with garbage. After a product has finished its useful lif=
e, most people just want a safe place to get rid of it, whether into a tr=
ash can, recycling bin or compost bucket. Today citizens pay three times=
for the stuff in our lives: once as consumers, again for someone to coll=
ect and manage our discards, and again in waning quality of life or taxes=
to clean up waste which has been littered, dumping, or leaked from the e=
ventual failure of the disposal system. There is no convenient, reliable=
way for citizens to see the environmental, social and political impacts =
of extraction, processing and delivery of the products in our "free marke=
t." Without such information, the market is not truly free, is no longer=
efficient, and can actually accelerate environmental destruction. =

Recycling in California is changing, and we can make it better. Durin=
g last two an a half decades our members have instigated the most rapid =
increase in recycling and composting facilities California has ever seen.=
Recycling and composting is growing more convenient with expanding dr=
op-off and buy-back recycling centers, curbside collection programs, mate=
rials recovery facilities, municipal composting facilities, and new recy=
cling-based manufacturing facilities. As a result, for many members of ou=
r communities the term recycling has become nearly synonymous with all re=
source conservation: whether it be waste reduction, composting, repair, o=
r water conservation. Ironically, the widespread availability of recycl=
ing collection gives the false impression that recycling solves our envir=
onmental problems and further action to reduce consumption is unnecessary=

The recycling industry has also changed. California has witnessed the as=
similation of hundreds of small haulers by large refuse collection compan=
ies. Garbage collection franchises now regularly have provisions for rec=
ycling, and many communities have built materials recovery facilities. CR=
RA and its affiliated organizations have more clearly defined the commodi=
ties collected and processed for recycling, and prices for these commodit=
ies are even traded on the futures markets of the Chicago Board of Trade.=
Similar efforts are underway to set standards for the quality of finishe=
d compost by CRRA's Compost Quality Council.

California laws regarding "recycling" and "waste" are under constant att=
ack. Both incineration and use of alternative daily cover in landfills =
have been redefined by the legislature to count as "recycling." Six year=
s later, there still is no legal mechanism requiring State agencies to co=
mply with the recycling laws the State places upon local governments. Wa=
ste prevention and environmental labeling laws have been repealed. There =
have even been misguided efforts to define all discarded materials - incl=
uding recyclables and compostables - as waste, and thus only to be collec=
ted by garbage franchises. =

Recovery, reuse, recycling and composting businesses tend to be smaller =
and more locally- based and produce far more jobs than disposal alone. F=
or products with deposits, there stand ready citizens who are willing and=
able to expand collections. As other programs have been cut, the money f=
rom recycling is also a substantial portion of income for many of Califor=
nia's most destitute citizens. All across the state, recycling programs =
are operated by non-profits who also serve youth, seniors, the mentally h=
andicapped, and the homeless. Tire retreading operations, bottle washin=
g facilities and diaper services all create more local jobs than their si=
ngle-use counterparts. We demand manufacturers take greater responsibili=
ty for their products and will support and applaud their action to do so.=
Businesses and citizens are incorporating lifecycle design into proc=
esses and products under conservation paradigms such as ISO 14000, Permac=
ulture, Biologic, industrial ecology, Designing for the Environment, natu=
ral building, and co-housing. We know we can save money, increase jobs, =
and help the environment. Our members do it every day. =

On an individual level, a movement to "Live simply" is quietly blossomin=
g. Many people are beginning to realize that we can each reduce our impa=
ct on the planet by living better lives with less stuff, which comes down=
to valuing and enhancing each object we touch and each person we meet. =
Waste is ignorance and unfamiliarity. When we use or do things which are=
unfamiliar, we are more wasteful. Loving the age and craftsmanship of d=
urable, repairable, reliable, and sustainable systems is the sentimental =
side of zero waste. So too people are resources which cannot be wasted. =
Truly, we waste less by loving more. =

To truly improve the material efficiency of our culture and economy, ov=
er the next forty years we must change everything: how we manage our publ=
ic lands, how our elected officials finance campaigns, how we design and =
manage our communities, how we design products and services, and how we d=
efine waste. We must move towards a state of zero waste: items which cann=
ot be safely assimilated into the environment simply cannot be sold, but=
only leased. =

Our 2020 vision:

1. A national materials policy encouraging conservation and resource reco=
very, monitoring and reporting of environmental impacts, and/or taxing e=
xtraction and pollution. In a Zero Waste world, product designers simply=
could not avoid considering the impacts of their products and services o=
n their suppliers' and clients' communities. =

2. Public information and local control. Local communities would be able =
to set higher local standards for environmental quality and tax for deple=
tion or degradation of resources. Local government would educate citizen=
s about waste prevention, composting, and proper handling of durables and=
no-sales, and would undertake local enforcement and reporting on complia=
nce with environmental laws. Measures of national and state success such=
as Gross Domestic Product would be modified to subtract costs for enviro=
nmental cleanup, crime, and social dissolution, and to count the value of=
volunteer and other non- monetary contributions to the economy. Citizens=
and businesses could access a convenient, reliable source of product in=
formation, including linked descriptions of the most common materials, m=
ining and processing methods used to produce goods. =0CZero Waste: Elim=
ination of discards which do not fit into one of the following categories=

3. Compostable or consumable. The product and package are a safe food for=
a living organism, or otherwise rendered stable and non-toxic. Local gov=
ernment would retain the responsibility for administering the collection =
and processing of food waste and other compostables as necessary to prote=
ct public health.

4. Durables: services not stuff. Many products including cars, TVs, tires=
, recyclable materials and computers would remain the property and respon=
sibility of the manufacturer. Manufacturers would be entirely responsibl=
e for the costs for separation, collection, and recycling, this would ult=
imately encourage repairable products made from fewer, more easily separ=
ated and recycled materials. =

5. No-sales: makers' takers. This portion of the materials stream inclu=
des toxins, refined heavy metals, and items which cannot be rendered stab=
le and non-toxic or safely used as food for a living organism. These pro=
ducts would be tagged to identify the manufacturer, and remain their prop=
erty and responsibility. =

Zero Waste is our guiding principle. We will reach our quest in stages,=
with policies stepping toward 2000, and a 2020 Vision for policies in th=
e longer term. We do not expect that this initiative will be popular w=
ith those who profit from the inefficiencies of our material economy. Th=
is change will likely only be possible through a cooperative effort with =
all organizations and individuals promoting conservation, waste preventio=
n, recycling, composting, and complementary perspectives. We want your h=
elp, and we stand ready to support all who walk with us down the path to =
Zero Waste. =


1. Zero Waste: Garbage is an unfunded mandate

Citizens should not have to pay once to acquire an object, again to be r=
id of it, and yet again to cleanup the damage from the extraction and dis=
posal. We have a market where the price signals, the incentives, and the=
information do not fully reflect the real costs of extraction and dispos=
al. Even with the most stringent controls, neither landfilling nor inci=
neration adequately protect the environment, as both fail to preserve, re=
turn or adequately recover the resources discarded. Unless we fix these =
aspects of the market, our growing population and consumption will widen =
our path torn through the interconnected web of life.

1. Zero Waste


Policies stepping towards 2000
Examples / Explanation


1. Continue to recognize and promote
improvements in material and energy
efficiency: innovative model businesses, local =

programs and integration of zero waste into
community planning =

Local adoption of Zero Waste policies, workshops,
meetings, case studies, web sites, existing awards
programs. California Integrated Waste Management
Board (CIWMB) could work with the Department of
Education to assure that classroom media do not promote
consumption over conservation. Promote diversion like
energy and water utilities promote conservation.


2. Identify research and internship priorities,
and work with student networks to organize
advocacy and research.
Full-cost accounting of landfill and incineration disposal; =

internships focusing on the collection, processing,
remanufacturing and marketing of a specific material;
performance testing of reusable, recycled products; cross-
reference standard industrial classification codes to study


3. Advocate for ending subsidies for landfills
and incinerators. Advocate research for
facilities which manage and contain accelerated
decomposition or otherwise achieve
environmental stability of unrecoverable refuse.
Oppose "put or pay" contracts for disposal facilities. =

Promote facilities which are designed primarily for
resource recovery rather than incineration or landfilling.
Support revision of RCRA Subtitle D to require control of
impacts for as long as waste poses a significant threat.


4. Promote industry-by-industry model
businesses and training on waste prevention
and resource conservation. Advocate that waste
reduction, reuse, and composting facilities
should have access to the financing associated
with other large public works projects.
Industry waste reduction profiles through trade
associations, minimum content standards, develop and
promote hierarchy of waste prevention. Promote voluntary =

adoption of Zero Waste pledges by industries and
communities, Waste Reduction Award Program, advocacy
of variable can rates. =



5. Support the 50% diversion mandate through
2000, with progress towards zero waste
afterwards measured by additional
jurisdictional five-year waste reduction goals. =

Zero waste would be achieved in each community by
establishing a material-specific recovery program and =

banning that material from the landfill or incinerator.
Such bans could compliment waste reduction goals. CRRA
will advocate for establishing community and material
specific waste reduction or elimination goals, and allowing
citizens to sue if such goals are not achieved.


6. Support the right of local communities to say
how much or how little environmental
degradation they are willing to tolerate. Work
to establish waste reduction goals and support
enforcement through citizen suits. =

States and cities increase control of products and
packaging that pose an undue burden on the environment
such as non-recyclable, non-biodegradable, and toxic
materials and excessive packaging. Support diversion
incentives for local collection and/or processing
companies. =



7. Advocate that State agencies must adhere to
all local ordinances passed to comply with State
mandates The State should not be allowed to
mandate local responsibility without allowing
for local planning and control.
Existing law allows State agencies to sidestep local
ordinances and franchises, yet local agencies are required
to plan for recycling and disposal capacity for these same
State agencies. =




2020 Vision
Examples / Explanation


1. Promote diverse local adoption of =

mandatory deposit laws for target materials, to
be implemented by 2005 unless an adequate
State deposit law is implemented first. Durables
and no-sales must have established recovery =

programs by 2005, or will be required to
implement take-back programs. =

Existing recycling programs would shift to funding by
industry-run non-profits established to coordinate material
reprocessing systems. Recovered no-sales would be safely
stored at manufacturer's expense until they could be


2. Advocate requiring manufacturers to be
responsible for 50% of the packaging sold in
the State by 2010, increasing to 100%
responsibility by 2020.
This policy is similar to that examined in the 1993
California Futures report to the CIWMB. One model for
the take back program would be the Portable Rechargeable
Battery Association, an industry-run non-profit collection
and recovery system charging license fees for its "seal." =

2. End Welfare for Wasting

To truly improve the material efficiency of our economy, we must pla=
ce a higher value on
the resources we extract from the earth than those we can pull from the w=
aste stream. At very
least, we must remove all subsidies which encourage the consumption and d=
isposal of the
resources our government stewards for our grandchildren and their descend=
ants. Our laws must
shift focus from managing wastes at the tail end of the pipe, to reducing=
the flow of new materials
into the economy. =

A.No More Money for Mining

Both national and state studies have listed the numerous, complicate=
d subsidies for
extraction and energy production. These subsidies make virgin extraction=
and manufacturing less
expensive compared to recycling-based manufacturing. Creating programs a=
nd laws to reuse,
recycle and compost is one way to value the resources in our economy. An=
other is to eliminate
the laws which devalue our resources and subsidize extraction and waste. =

2A. End Welfare for Wasting: No More Money for Mining


2020 Vision
Examples / Explanation


1. Advocate replacing employment taxes with
equivalent user fees and taxes on disposal,
mining and/or resource extraction.
Defend and expand bottle bill provisions making
manufacturers pay processing costs and requiring that
recycling be convenient. Add containers to the bottle bill
and increase deposits on tires. Advance disposal fees and
disposal surcharges are intermediate steps toward including
the full cost of landfill or incineration into current prices. =

Tax bads, not goods. =



2. Network of CRRA activists and
representatives work on tax reform, legislative
subsidies, and national resource policy issues
Have tax and resource policy web links on homepage, =

newsletters, articles. Work with groups and declare the
theme for Earth Day 2000 to be Zero Waste. =



3. Support the elimination of timber
End subsidies. Make loggers pay for new roads on timber
lands. Increase timber yield tax. =

4. Support the elimination of energy subsidies.
End subsidies for energy related to oil severance taxes,
percentage depletion deductions, and expensing of
intangible drilling costs. Depletion deductions also
subsidize nonfuel mining.

5 Advocate that tax and resource use policies
be subject to CEQA and NEPA.
As both State and National tax policies have direct bearing
on the costs of extraction, and the magnitude of associated
impacts, it is reasonable to demand these policies should be
subject to existing standards of environmental review.

6. Support efforts at the national level to
eliminate timber and energy subsidies, and tax
pollution, disposal, and resource depletion. In
a political climate dominated by debate of
budget deficits and program cuts, government
handouts of this magnitude are fiscally and
environmentally inexcusable, and must be
abolished. =

Eliminate federal" welfare for wasting, " to include: below-
cost mining leases through the Mining Law of 1872 (under
which our government signed over title to $15 billion of our
mineral resources for $16,000 in 1994 alone); below-cost
timber sales; energy subsidies (over $26 billion annually);
depletion allowances (over $1 billion annually); and tax
code benefits to the timber industry (over $450 million
annually). Conduct joint protests with tax reform and
conservation groups - perhaps making Zero Waste a theme
for Earth Day 2000. =

B.Leading with a label

For a free market to offer real choices, consumers mus=
t have full knowledge of the
product or service they purchase, including the costs they pay to remedia=
te the environmental
damage caused by the extraction and manufacturing of the product. As we =
surf the first waves of
the information age, we must assure that citizens can make ever more info=
rmed decisions about
the life-cycle impacts of products. Until and unless manufacturers are a=
ble to have the full costs
of their product included in the purchase price (i.e. no externalities), =
such labeling should be
mandatory. =

2B. End Welfare for Wasting: Lead with a Label


Stepping towards 2000
Examples / Explanation


1. Support research, advocacy and exchange
to reduce waste and spread ideas which help
us each to reduce our impact on the earth. =

Expanding public awareness that the quantity and toxicity
of coal and metal mining wastes dwarf the quantity of
materials put into landfills. This is key to describing the
full impacts of our materials economy. =



2. Begin assembling a database of resources
available to the public which are helpful in
assessing the mass balance of inputs, outputs,
cross-media transfers (e.g. evaporation of
liquids), and discards for all major industrial
processes, starting with the most commonly
used packaging materials. =

The Packaging Study by the Tellus Institute provides a
model for assessing the first-order lifecycle impact of a
specific material. =



3. Work closely with industry associations to
develop and advocate a model form of
environmental labeling.
The laudable efforts of companies such as Green Seal and
Scientific Certification Systems are steps in the right
direction. The nutritional labeling of food products also
provides a good model of how to briefly summarize a
complex set of information. =



C.Campaign Finance Reform

As professionals in resource recovery, we are all too f=
amiliar with the hundreds of political
campaigns each year which are won using corporate contributions. In retu=
rn, companies are
compensated with increased privileges or additional subsidies for resourc=
e extraction. Like tax
reform, campaign finance reform is a very complicated topic, but it is cr=
itical to improving the
resource efficiency of our economy. We must support actions by other gro=
ups in this direction.


2C. End Welfare for Wasting: Campaign Finance Reform


Stepping towards 2000
Examples / Explanation


1. Increase network communications with
groups working on campaign finance reform.
Share articles , include web links. Publish list of legislators
receiving largest contributions from most wasteful
companies. =



2. As opportunity arises, challenge or reverse
through legislation court decisions that 1)
corporations should have the same rights as
other citizens, and that 2) money is
equivalent to speech under the protections of
the Constitution.
These legal opinions are two of the most fundamental
hurdles to real campaign finance reform. In a society where
every person and corporation are entitled to all the free
speech they can buy, the individual cannot speak as freely
as the wealthy corporation.

3. Jumpstart Local Jobs with Discards and Design

Reuse, composting and recycling conserve resources, create jobs and =
build communities. =

A principle impediment to increasing material recovery is unlimited, low =
cost disposal. Large,
centralized disposal systems like landfills and incinerators are simpler =
for politicians to sell,
governments to manage and insure, banks to finance, and businesses to mak=
e profitable. =

Decentralized systems are more local, more complex, and a greater challen=
ge to manage as a
public works project, but fundamentally more resilient to changes in the =
marketplace. =

Research has shown that reuse and repair are not only a top priority=
in waste reduction,
but also the best opportunities for creating jobs per ton of material rec=
overed. Simply sorting and
processing recyclables sustains 5 to 10 times more jobs than incineration=
or landfilling. Each
step a community takes to add value to materials recovered from the strea=
m of discards means
more local jobs and more local self-reliance. Our businesses create jobs=
, use local materials, and
help the environment. Unfortunately the entry capital costs and risks ar=
e high, and the profit
margins are low. When we reach zero waste, the fees adequate to sustain t=
hese recovery
businesses will be collected at the purchase counter, not at the gate of =
the landfill. =

More zero waste jobs are found by swimming upstream to designers, an=
alysts and code
officials. We can support schools of design which emphasize life-cycle d=
esign, consumable or
reusable packaging, less toxic solvents and processes, designing for disa=
ssembly and recycling. =

Zero waste principles compliment movements in architecture and urban plan=
ning toward natural
building and regional landscaping techniques, integrated self-sufficient =
urban design with facilities, =

libraries and food banks for sharing resources within a community. =

3. Jumpstart Jobs from Design and Discards


Stepping towards 2000
Examples / Explanation


1. Advocate reducing the cost of performance
testing of products with high potential for
waste reduction.
Work with CIWMB to promote design principles for waste
reduction and models for performance specifications and
testing for recycled products, crop-specific compost
applications, and local zoning and building codes. =



2. Work with members and local
governments to establish model integrated
recovery facilities, incorporating serial drop-
off, salvage, and resale.
Urban Ore in Berkeley and Recycletown in Santa Rosa
serve as some of the first examples of how to incorporate
salvage and resale into a flexible, multi-material recovery
operation. =



3. Advocate and defend the right of
entrepreneurs to be paid for collection and
recovery of discards . Advocate for adequate
capital to be available for reuse and recovery
as well as for recycling and composting.
Update policy affirming that salvage and recovery services
should be allowed to charge a fee for their services, and that
new garbage franchises should preserve or create ongoing
incentives to encourage private initiative to increase
recovery. Work with CIWMB to address problems
obtaining capital for new recycling-based manufacturers.


4. Advocate for increased agricultural use of
compost and mulch products derived from
urban yard debris. Market incentives must
address investment costs, which exceed short-
term benefit.
The .Federal Environmental Quality Incentives Program
offers growers long-term contracts that provide cost-sharing
payments for eligible conservation practices, and a similar
program could be set up for the use of compost and mulch. =



5. Support and coordinate with planners,
architects, code officials, and designers who
are working to design services, products,
buildings and communities with less impact
on t he environment =

Continue to work with other groups working on
performance-based design and codes, ISO 14000,
Designing for the Environment, Biologic, natural building,
and other design paradigms which improve resource
efficiency and reduce environmental impacts. =



6. Support increasing recycled content,
standard environmental labeling, and other
market development initiatives.
Expand California's Buy Recycled Training Manual,
expand and improve environmental labeling, work to
establish mechanisms to reduce risk or cost of capital for
recovery and composting facilities


7. Advocate that 15% of beverage containers
under the bottle bill are refilled in 2005, using
tradeable credits. =

Refer to the 1993 Report to the CIWMB by California

Tedd Ward, principal author
with contributions from the Grassroots Recycling Network, Rick Anthony, S=
teve Suess, Gary Liss, Jeffrey
Smedberg, Susan Kinsella, Dan Knapp, Brenda Platt, Neil Seldman, David Ki=
rkpatrick, Bill Sheehan, Howard
Levenson, Sandra Jerabek, Bill Shireman, Rick Best, Dan DeGrassi and the =
rest of the California Resource
Recovery Association =0C =



Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 17:55:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: America Recycles Day

Here is what one of the CRRA members thinks about America Recycles Day.
(She was also the big instigator of making the CRRA conference Zero Waste
theme happen, and the local cahir of the conference....)
Please let me know what you think:

Dear Board Members-

Thank you for revisiting your decision to support America Recycles Day and
the letter of commendation to McDonalds.

Please consider the following issues in your discussion this afternoon:

Who is supporting America Recycles Day?

The following are all national steering committee members:

**Direct Marketing Association-the "junk mail folks"

**American Plastics Council-all talk and no action on plastics recycling

** the National Soft Drink Association- inaction on refillables and recycled
content containers

**American Forest and Paper Association-fighters of forest protection

**Chemical Specialties Manufacturing Association---toxic chemical promoters

**Keep America Beautiful-fighters of bottle bills

**Eastman Kodak-dumpers of toxic chemicals in America's waterways

**Dow Corning-knowing creators of hazardous products

**Walt Disney-leaders in transforming children into consumers

The National Sierra Club turned down an invitation to participate on this
steering committee because it sounded like corporate greenwashing to them.
Shouldn't CRRA find out more about this before committing our support?

What can we expect from America Recycles Day:

**Promotion of Zero Waste Concept or Technologies? No.

**Discussion about Producer Responsibility? No.

**End of Subsidies for Wasting and Resource Extraction? No.

**Critique of our Disposable, Consumption Based Lifestyle? No.

America Recycles Day does not tackle the tough issues-they actively avoid
addressing them. How then does America Recycles Day further the current
goals of CRRA?

What then should CRRA do?

**At the very least, advocate for Zero Waste messages and actions.

**Consider the ramifications of supporting corporate greenwashing.

**Join with other grassroots activists to highlight the REAL issues and take
REAL actions.

Remember that CRRA is looked to as a credible leader. What would CRRA be
getting in return for our endorsement of this questionable and highly suspect

Robin Salsburg


Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 17:09:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: "David A. Kirkpatrick" <>
Subject: Food Stamps for the Timber Industry

TIMBER ROADS: Scott Sonner wrote for AP yesterday an amendment to cut
federal taxpayer spending on logging roads in national forests is
reaching critical mass. Senator Richard Bryan (D-NV) is expected to
sponsor an amendment to the Interior spending bill today. Senator
Bryan called the timber roads program "food stamps for the timber
industry," and released a letter from Agriculture Secretary Dan
Glickman stating, "Roads represent one of the greatest environmental
problems on the forests."

GREENLines, Wed., Sept. 17, 1997 from GREEN,
the GrassRoots Environmental Effectiveness Network


Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 09:12:21 -0700
From: Myra Nissen <>
Subject: Looking for thank you cards on recycled paper

I am looking for thank you cards made from recycled paper.

I like to send thank you cards to my new customers. Because I work for
a paper recycling company & because it is the right thing to do, I like
to use cards made from recycled paper. I used to be able to readily
find them at my neighborhood stationers, even by Halmark. Now, I can't
find them anywhere.

Anyone have any ideas. I hope to find them locally, San Francisco Bay
Area, or mail order.

Myra Nissen


Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 13:38:05 -0400
Subject: Looking for thank you cards on recycled paper

Myra Nissen wrote:
> I am looking for thank you cards made from recycled paper.
> I like to send thank you cards to my new customers. Because I work for
> a paper recycling company & because it is the right thing to do, I like
> to use cards made from recycled paper. I used to be able to readily
> find them at my neighborhood stationers, even by Halmark. Now, I can't
> find them anywhere.
> Anyone have any ideas. I hope to find them locally, San Francisco Bay
> Area, or mail order.
> Myra Nissen
> 510-744-9551
Check out Earth Care (1-800-347-0070) [Monday - Friday; 6 AM - 8 PM and
Saturday 8 AM - 6 PM Pacific Standard Time] which was bought by Real
Goods ( in the last year or two and share the
snailmail address of: 555 Leslie Street
CA 95482-8507 (Earth Care)
CA 95482-5576 (Real Goods)
They carry a variety of 100% post consumer notecards in their
"EarthNotes" line.
Best of Luck,
Reduce, ReUse, Recycle, Compost - It's a small planet!


Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 15:51:34 +0200
Subject: Two items

Jennifer Hyde writes:

>Also, I am working with a cosmetics manufacturer that wants to sell in their
>stores hip, good quality, and tasteful accessories made with recycled
>materials. Does anyone have any suggestions of where to find these items?

Please e-mail Michelle McLean

She has some info on a small database we have been building up through our
provincial recycling forum in KwaZulu Natal, South Africa - I am sure she
will do her best to assist - do tell her I referred you, OK?

Good luck! (and you can pass on other sources you find to me, ok?)


Mr. Muna Lakhani
Cellfax: 082-131-416-9160
28 Currie Road - Durban - 4001 - South Africa
Phone: +27-31-20-28-291


Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 23:07:10 -0400
From: "Bill Sheehan" <>
Subject: What Is Zero Waste?

The document below was drafted by numerous participants at the
Rock Eagle Zero Waste Campaign Kick-Off Conference in Georgia
last April. Thought it might be appropriate in light of all
the discussion on zero waste on these e-waves lately.
--Bill S.


ZeroWaste is not a goal, it is a planning approach for the 21st
Century. Just as the Balanced Federal Budget is good for all
Americans, so too is the new ZeroWaste planning strategy. Just
as the budget may never get balanced and our society may never
eliminate all waste, both of these ideas are visions for the
future which inspire and give hope to our children. [sounds
negative - already giving up]

Is ZeroWaste necessary? As human populations and material
needs increase dramatically, the natural systems which sustain
us are suffering from accelerated degradation. Over the next
forty years, our society will change in almost every way.
ZeroWaste defines the discipline required to create a more
sustainable intercourse with our natural world.

The American economic system stands for individual freedom,
free markets and making a profit. GRN wishes to add to that a
design principle for making money with the least amount of
pollution, the greatest number of new jobs, and the greatest
degree of local economic self-reliance which rewards the
entrepreneur that protects the environment for our children.

Our Three Platforms are:
_ ZeroWaste - Or Pretty Darn Close!
_ Create Jobs, Not Waste
_ End Corporate Subsidies For Waste

Activities which GRN will be supporting at the grassroots
across the nation:

(1) Tax Shifting. Instead of giving incentives for wasting, we
should give tax credits and economic incentives for reducing
waste and utilizing recovered materials.

(2) Manufacturers Responsibility. Garbage collection and waste
management is an unfunded mandate which falls almost entirely
on local governments. Manufacturers and producers of the
products that become waste need to share in that

(3) Minimum-Content Standards. Manufacturers need to help
close the loop by using the materials collected in local
recycling programs to manufacture new products.

(4) Unit-Pricing for Trash. Residents and businesses need to
be given the incentive to reduce waste and recycle through
variable garbage rate. The public should have the opportunity
to eliminate their garbage bill if they achieve Zero Waste.

(5) Full-Cost Accounting and Life-Cycle Analysis. Any analysis
needs to involve a full accounting of the economic and
environmental benefits of waste prevention and recycling,
including avoided tipping fees, lower energy and water usage,
reduced air and water pollution, lower material costs for

(6) Ending subsidies for the extraction of virgin resources.
The time has come to put an end to subsidies to the resource
extraction industries

(7) Creating Jobs Through Reuse and Recycling. Waste
prevention and recycling provides a tremendous opportunity to
create jobs and initiate new business ventures.

(8) Enacting Campaign Finance Reform. Much of resistance to
change our resource policies come from the industries who
profit from waste and are control the agenda in federal, state
and local governments.

(9) Taking Consumer Action Against Wasteful Activities.


Bill Sheehan
Zero Waste Associates
268 Janice Drive
Athens GA 30606
Tel & Fax 706-208-1416


End of GreenYes Digest V97 #224