More zero waste jobs are found by swimming upstream to designers, analysts
and code officials.
There are many schools of design which emphasize life-cycle design,
consumable or reusable
packaging, less toxic solvents and processes, designing for disassembly and
recycling, natural
building and landscaping techniques, integrated self-sufficient urban design
with shared public
spaces and facilities, or libraries and food banks for sharing resources
within a community. For
example, finding products where non-recyclable plastics used for packaging
or medical used could
be replaced by compostable substitute materials.
Jump start Jobs from Design and Discards
Stepping towards 2000
Examples
1. Advocate mechanisms to reduce the
cost for performance testing of
products with high potential for waste
reduction.
In many cases, the principle barriers to wider
acceptance of these design strategies is the
community-by-community, case-by-case battles
with zoning, performance specifications and
testing, and building codes.
2. Advocate and defend the right for
entrepreneurs to be paid for collection
and recovery of discards
Update fee for service policy to preserves ongoing
incentives to inspire private initiative to increase
recovery.
3. Support increasing recycled content,
standard environmental labeling, and
other market development initiatives.
California Buy Recycled Training Manual,
labeling, mechanisms to reduce risk or cost of
capital
4. 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 Futures.
Tedd Ward, principal author
707-465-1100, 707-465-1300 FAX
e-mail: NCOL0043@telis.com
References
--=====================_862848270==_
Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="RESOLUN";
x-mac-type="42494E41"; x-mac-creator="6D646F73"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="RESOLUN"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--=====================_862848270==_--
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 16:37:03 +0100
From: "Joe Strahl" <Joseph.Strahl@iiiee.lu.se>
Subject: beverage containers in Sweden
I've been reading through some of the exchange about recycling of
beverage containers and the resistance of some manufacturers to begin
to refill. Some messages have referred to the situation "in other
countries". Perhaps some of the information below could prove helpful
in arguments for less unsustainable packaging:
Carbonated beverages in Sweden are sold in glass bottles (33 cl)
aluminum cans (33cl and 50 cl) and in plastic bottles of various
sizes (the most common being 1.5 liters in size, there are also
smaller sizes like 33 cl) . All have deposits.
The aluminum cans have been part of a recycling system for about ten
years now. The current deposit is 0.50 SEK which is about 7 US
cents). The recycling rate for such cans is greater than 90%. The
deposit can be redeemed at most grocery stores where there is a
reverse vending machine which identifies the can as a valid can (sold
in Sweden, the machines reads the bar code on the can), crushes the
can and issues a receipt. Most grocery stores have the reverse
vending machine in the store, some at the entrance, some near where
carbonated beverages are sold.
The aluminium is then collected and taken to a smelter in Sweden
where the crushed cans get feed into new aluminum sheet coil
production.
Glass bottles (33 cl) are still used for many carbonated beverages
but the market share is not high.
Plastic bottles were only allowed on the market after a former
Minister for the Environment placed the demand that such bottles must
be either refillable or recyclable for their introduction to the
market.
The refillable PET made its debut first, it is claimed that it can be
refilled 20 times, currently it has a deposit of 4SEK per bottle
(which is about 52 US cents) and is only sold in the 1.5 liter size.
The recyclable PET is also available in the 1.5 liter size, and 2.0
liters as well I believe, with a deposit of 2SEK per bottle (which is
about 26 US cents). There are also smaller bottles which I think
holds
50 cl and I don't recall the deposit on them (no one in my family
buys these).
As a side note, the *refillable* PET is so robust that it can be used
for other purposes, I've heard of children being told to take them to
school for science class experiments, before they get back into
the system.
The aluminum can and refillable PET systems are run by one company,
called Returpack AB. The financing for the two kinds of beverage
containers are managed separately (each system carries its own
weight). The glass and refillable PETs are managed by the
brewers/fillers more directly.
With regard to the aluminum can recovery system, Finland started a
similar system last year and Norway is considering this as well.
Denmark has had a ban on non-glass carbonated beverage containers for
some time now and this has, so far, been upheld within the EU.
**********************************
Joe Strahl
The International Institute for
Industrial Environmental Economics
at Lund University, Sweden
P.O. Box 196, S-221 00 Lund
Sweden
direct tel. +46 - 46 - 222 02 28
telefax +46 - 46 - 222 02 30
replies Joe.Strahl@iiiee.lu.se
**********************************
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 12:56:14 +0900
From: oldxeye@crisscross.com (Hop)
Subject: Coke's response to Web site inquiry
Such a claim from Coke (ie. "all of our packaging is recyclable") would be
in breach of the Trade Practices Act in Australia. Perhaps you could write
a brief letter and get the equivalent body in the US involved. You may not
get a quick or favourable response from the bureaucracy ... but the extra
publicity is worth the small effort, and it gives the issue attention from
yet another angle.
>Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 18:26:51 -0500
>From: Pete Pasterz <Pete.Pasterz@USDWP.MSU.EDU>
>Subject: Coke's response to Web site inquiry
>
>This attached is the (non) response I received when inquiring about Coke's
>lack >of PETE committment. Maybe others can visit and ask the same/similar
>questions?
>
>This E-Mail response is being delivered by an automated process
>
>that can not accept a reply to this message. If you wish to
>
>reply to this message, please visit us again on our web site
>
>at http://www.cocacola.com and submit another E-Query.
>
>
>
>Thank you for your comments, your original question/comment was:
>
>
>
>Why have you backed out of your comittment to use 25% post-consumer
>
>recycled ...PETE plastic in your packaging?You are NOT "recycling"
>
>unless you buy and ...use recycled materials.
>
>
>
>Our response is as follows:
>
>
>
>Thank you for contacting The Coca-Cola Company via e-mail. We
>
>appreciate your taking the time to let us know your feelings,
>
>Mr. Pasterz.
>
>
>
>We want to assure you that The Coca-Cola Company is committed to
>
>the environment, and all of our packaging is recyclable. In
>
>addition, we will share your comments and concern with our
>
>Environmental Affairs department.
>
>
>
>If you have additional questions or comments, please visit our
>
>Web site again.
>
>
>
>Jennifer Bernbrock
>
>The Coca-Cola Company
>
>Industry and Consumer Affairs
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 01:14:12, -0500
From: david_reynolds@prodigy.com ( DAVID B REYNOLDS)
Subject: Coke's response to Web site inquiry
Hop,
In the U.S., the Federal Trade Commission has set guidelines related
to "recyclable" and "recycled," but there is nothing in place that
has any teeth. If product manufacturers want to add some legitimacy
to claims, they can go through a recognized certification
organization. The certification route was being seriously considered
by many manufacturers in the late 80's/early 90's when it looked as
though "green marketing" could have a significant impact as reflected
by public opinion polls. Unfortunately, consumer actions have not
reflected the sentiments expressed in those polls, and manufacturers
know this.
Individual States in the U.S. can add more specifics and teeth. In
California, we had the Truth in Environmental Advertising Law. It
was repealed in a previous legislative session, but it has been
introduced through a bill within the present session.
What concerns me more is the ignorance displayed by Coca-Cola's
Industry and Consumer Affairs rep in her response to Pete Pasterz,
where she talks about Coke's packaging as being recyclable, when
Pete's question specifically dealt with recycled content. One can
only hope that the folks in Coke's Environmental Affairs Department
are not equally ignorant.
Dave Reynolds
Enviro-nomics
-----------------------------------------------------------
Such a claim from Coke (ie. "all of our packaging is recyclable")
would be
in breach of the Trade Practices Act in Australia. Perhaps you could
write
a brief letter and get the equivalent body in the US involved. You
may not
get a quick or favourable response from the bureaucracy ... but the
extra
publicity is worth the small effort, and it gives the issue attention
from
yet another angle.
>Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 18:26:51 -0500
>From: Pete Pasterz <Pete.Pasterz@USDWP.MSU.EDU>
>Subject: Coke's response to Web site inquiry
>
>This attached is the (non) response I received when inquiring about
Coke's
>lack >of PETE committment. Maybe others can visit and ask the
same/similar
>questions?
>
>This E-Mail response is being delivered by an automated process
>
>that can not accept a reply to this message. If you wish to
>
>reply to this message, please visit us again on our web site
>
>at http://www.cocacola.com and submit another E-Query.
>
>
>
>Thank you for your comments, your original question/comment was:
>
>
>
>Why have you backed out of your comittment to use 25% post-consumer
>
>recycled ...PETE plastic in your packaging?You are NOT "recycling"
>
>unless you buy and ...use recycled materials.
>
>
>
>Our response is as follows:
>
>
>
>Thank you for contacting The Coca-Cola Company via e-mail. We
>
>appreciate your taking the time to let us know your feelings,
>
>Mr. Pasterz.
>
>
>
>We want to assure you that The Coca-Cola Company is committed to
>
>the environment, and all of our packaging is recyclable. In
>
>addition, we will share your comments and concern with our
>
>Environmental Affairs department.
>
>
>
>If you have additional questions or comments, please visit our
>
>Web site again.
>
>
>
>Jennifer Bernbrock
>
>The Coca-Cola Company
>
>Industry and Consumer Affairs
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 20:43:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: michele@raymond.com (Michele Raymond)
Subject: EPR for Plastics: Does it work?
Extended Producer Responsibility
--MR
At 01:51 PM 5/2/97 EST, grussell@nybg.org wrote:
> Q: what's "EPR" ?
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 10:53:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Recyclemi@aol.com
Subject: Funding Recycling
Greetings
A Michigan House of Representatives Committee will soon be taking up an
important bill. HB 4037 eliminates flow control and mandatory solid waste
planning, and also leaves resource recovery in a corner of the basement. The
Michigan Recycling Coalition is trying to bring recycling issues back to the
table.
Among other things, we may advocate for a statewide surcharge on landfill
tipping fees. The funds would be redistributed to support resource recovery
projects, initiatives, and research. Information on ways other states fund
recycling initiatives would be helpful to our cause. I am interesting in
hearing the actual $ amounts of disposal surcharges, taxes, and other
innovative ways to fund recycling.
Thanks a lot!
Kerrin O'Brien
Executive Director
Michigan Recycling Coalition
(517) 371-7073
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 11:39 -0800 (PST)
From: "Lacaze, Skip" <Skip.Lacaze@ci.sj.ca.us>
Subject: Funding Recycling
The disposal surcharges currently in effect in San Jose, California, are as
follows:
State: $1.34 per ton - funds California Integrated Waste Management
Board activities
County: Countywide Integrated Waste Management Fee (AB 939 Fee):
$1.30 per ton - distributed to local jurisdictions to fund waste
diversion
County Solid Waste Planning Fee: $0.42 per ton - funds regional
facility & diversion planning and some regional diversion outreach
City: Disposal Facility Tax: $13.00 per ton - all to General Fund
Solid Waste Enforcement Fee: $0.58 per ton - funds Local Enforcement
Agency facility inspection and permitting, plus storage and collection
enforcement (this fee applies to *all* tons delivered to disposal and
processing sites; the other fees do not apply to soil and inerts
properly
used on site, or materials that are composted or recycled).
The Disposal Facility Tax is not used to fund recycling activity, but it is
high
enough to result in significant diversion in the private sector (as well as
what
appears to be tax avoidance that does not relate to legitimate diversion).
----------
From: Recyclemi
To: Skip; greenyes
Subject: Funding Recycling
Date: Monday, May 05, 1997 8:16AM
Greetings
A Michigan House of Representatives Committee will soon be taking up an
important bill. HB 4037 eliminates flow control and mandatory solid waste
planning, and also leaves resource recovery in a corner of the basement.
The
Michigan Recycling Coalition is trying to bring recycling issues back to the
table.
Among other things, we may advocate for a statewide surcharge on landfill
tipping fees. The funds would be redistributed to support resource recovery
projects, initiatives, and research. Information on ways other states fund
recycling initiatives would be helpful to our cause. I am interesting in
hearing the actual $ amounts of disposal surcharges, taxes, and other
innovative ways to fund recycling.
Thanks a lot!
Kerrin O'Brien
Executive Director
Michigan Recycling Coalition
(517) 371-7073
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 15:41:25 +0900
From: oldxeye@crisscross.com (Hop)
Subject: help with internalized costs argument
In reply to Amy Perry who asked for help as follows:
>I spoke as part of a roundtable discussion on the future of recycling at the
>New England Envionmental Expo last week. Joining me on the panel were:
>
>Earl Gorman, Container Recycling Alliance (glass)
>Paul Thompson, Steel Recycling Institute
>Ron Perkins, American Plastics Council
>MA state recycling director (Robin Ingenthron)
>a local recycling hauler/processor (Ben Harvey)
>Jon Gold, Newark Group (recycled paper manufacturer)
>John Stutz, Tellus Institute
>Steve Anderson from RRS (MRF operator)
>
>The session was organized and moderated by Edgar Miller, NRC.
>
>Key questions discussed:
>What is an achievable national recycling rate, what are the major barriers to
>increasing recycling, commodity-specific problems/difficulties, what
>steps/strategies are needed to increase recycling.
>
>Needless to say, I was the radical of the bunch. But I was not nearly as
>compelling as I should have been on one point: that of internalized costs.
>This is what I mean:
>
>The conversation continually returned to the cost issue -- recycled
>feedstocks cost more, recycling economics are tough, etc. While we of course
>talked about minimum content standards, procurement, and other market
>improvement tactics to improve recycling's economics, I did not say, nor did
>anyone else, that the root problem is that society has not yet figured out
>how to "price" the value of clean air, etc. so all of the costs being
>discussed were not true, full costs.
>
>Does anyone on this list have a simple way of explaining this argument, like
>1 or 2 paragprahs, that they have written or read, that I and possibly others
>who, although experienced in the field, could learn from??
>
>Thanks so much.
>
>Amy
Following are the opening few paragraphs from a talk I gave at a forum
similar to the one Amy describes. My suggestion is to relate the issue back
to nature - concluding that industry should 'close the loop' with its
products and packaging and thereby internalise the environmental costs of
production. I hope this helps a bit.
Extract follows ....
It can hardly be argued that we humans act naturally. Given that "natural",
by our own common-day use of the term implies 'uninfluenced by human
activity'. In fact the opposite is true - we humans are influenced by human
activity in everything we think, and everything we do.
Probably the greatest influence on us is caused by that inescapable human
invention - money. The root of all evil as they say. Although it is
probably not the case for many of us here, money drives most people to do
things they wouldn't otherwise do - such as work ridiculous hours, often at
jobs they would otherwise have no interest in. And the money they earn?
Much of it goes towards things they may fleetingly want, but almost
certainly don't need.
I don't need to remind you our society is consumption driven. After all,
it's that consumption, or at least the waste that results, that has brought
us together today. But it is worth reminding you that in nature there is no
waste. So if we desire a less wasteful society perhaps we need to simulate
nature.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 12:21:18 -0700
From: Carolyn Chase <cdchase@qualcomm.com>
Subject: RECYCLING: ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY TO FORM STUDY GROUP
Anybody connected into this?
Greenwire 5/2/97
*15 RECYCLING: ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY TO FORM STUDY GROUP
The electronics industry has proposed forming a new
organization to develop "environmentally and economically sound
strategies" for managing obsolete electronic equipment. The
Electronic Product Recovery and Recycling Roundtable will examine
productive reuses for existing equipment and develop design and
production methods to minimize its environmental impacts.
The roundtable -- which will be comprised of representatives
from industry, interest groups, all levels of government,
academics and third-party recyclers -- will be managed by the
National Safety Council's Environmental Health Center under a
grant from the US EPA. The idea for the roundtable came from the
EPA's Common Sense Initiative, which targeted the growing volume
of "end-of-life" electronic equipment as an emerging issue
impacting the nation's waste stream (BUSINESS AND THE
ENVIRONMENT, 4/97 issue).
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 11:20:59 -0700
From: Carolyn Chase <cdchase@qualcomm.com>
Subject: San Diego Earth Times May 1997 issue is online
The San Diego Earth Times May 1997 issue is now online at:
www.sdearthtimes.com
Table of Contents:
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 13:56:51 -0500
From: RecycleWorlds <anderson@msn.fullfeed.com>
Subject: Synopsis of Report on Field Test of ONP Home Storage to Alleviate
Market Downturns
New Strategy to Counter Downturns in ONP Markets
Background
Curbside recycling programs have very significant problems =
accommodating themselves to the gyrating markets for recyclables. Not =
only is this because scrap material is a commodity, but also because, =
when prices are depressed due to supply exceeding demand, the collection =
systems have not been able to reduce the supply of the material to =
return to equilibrium. =20
The reason for this non-responsiveness is that once residents have been =
educated to separate a specified list of materials, it would be a =
practical impossibility to move materials in and out of that list to =
reflect market prices without confusing those residents. Additionally, =
this practice would be the antithesis of much of what recycling has been =
intended to accomplish.
When prices are headed down, the markets know that the supply will =
continue almost without regard to how low prices drop, and this =
knowledge is reflected in their pricing policies. Thus, the =
non-responsiveness of supply to price tends to further accentuate =
commodity price swings.
Old newspapers (ONP), the mainstay of most recycling programs with =
one-half to three quarters of the total weight of the material =
collected, has long suffered from these problems.
In Wisconsin, the Department of Natural Resources ONP Workgroup looked =
to a solution in the use of storage silos in agriculture to hold back =
supply when it significantly exceeds demand. While the use of actual =
warehouses to store ONP during periods of excess capacity have been =
found during the current market glut to be too expensive, the group, =
instead, proposed to use home storage to achieve the same purpose. =
Specifically, this would involve requesting participants in curbside =
programs to store their newspaper in their garage, basement or storage =
shed until the oversupply conditions have passed.=20
Benefits could accrue on two levels. At the local (or micro) level, if =
material can be held back until prices improve without any transaction =
cost then sales will be made into better paying markets. This, by =
itself, is reason for many localities to consider the strategy if it =
works in the field. Furthermore, on an economy-wide (or macro) plane, if =
due to the independent actions of many localities, overall supply is =
better matched to market demand, then the price swings themselves might =
be tempered. This would be icing on the cake.
Obviously, not everyone is willing to home store, and not all those who =
are willing are able. However, it must be kept in mind that the amount =
of people needed to engage in home storage to prevent an oversupply of =
ONP would not be that large. Based upon the widest swing in total North =
American newspaper production between the highest and lowest operating =
rates, the necessary storage probably only need be 5%-7%.
To find out whether this was achievable, the Wisconsin Recycling Market =
Development Board provided funding to RecycleWorlds Consulting to =
conduct field tests using a standard test group/control group and =
pretest/posttest study design. Two demographically similar middle-income =
residential subdivisions of single family homes in Fitchburg, Wisconsin, =
were selected as the test and control groups. There were 177 households =
in the test group, and 188 in the control group.
Results
In communities with similar recycling demographics to Fitchburg, it is =
possible to home store about one- half of the newspaper stream for two =
months from single family districts, and, we estimate, approximately =
one-quarter over four months.
If done by one community alone, this can be a means to shift part of =
its newspaper collection out of the worst of market declines when prices =
can fall in panic selling to a negative $20-$30 per ton. Programs with =
managers who are informed about underlying market forces will be in a =
better position to time the market. Less informed managers otherwise =
might begin home storage too early and exhaust their participants' =
ability to store before the bottom is reached.
If many communities individually decide to encourage home storage to =
gain that advantage, then additional benefits arise. The cumulative =
quantities that can be held back from the scrap paper markets through =
widespread home storage appear sufficient to alleviate the worst =
distress conditions before they arise.=20
Copies of the full report are available for $25 from RecycleWorlds =
Consulting, 4513 Vernon Blvd, Suite 15, Madison, WI 53705-4964. =
Questions, comments or phone orders 608-231-1100.
------------------------------
Date: (null)
From: (null)
Transportation
Carolyn takes the trolley 4
Our intrepid editor gives it a try in our home town.
Rail: the wave of the past 5
Going carless in Cartopia by Michael Oshman 6
Why would someone give up their car if they didn't have to? Find
out.
Jobs & Sustainability
Sustainable Development: A labor view 7
The real choice is not jobs or enviornment, it is both or neither
Environmental careers by David Bainbridge 8
A professional educator shares the keys to finding a job in an
environmental field.
Our lost wealth: people + natural resources = real wealth, Natural
Capital by Paul Hawken 10
Know how we grow by Bill Daugherty 11
How much open space can we afford to lose?
Air Quality
To air is human 12
Politicians take stands for and against stricter clean air
standards proposed by the E.P.A..
May is Clean Air Month 13
Bike to Work Day: 5/22, Get a Tune-Up Day, 5/22 and Clean Commute
Day, 5/30
Living Environment
A Heavy Metal Story 14
Whenever you're inside a building, you are surrounded by paint.
Do you know what's in it?
Just say no to poisons! 14
High-quality finishes that respect the environment are available.
Health and Diet
Clear your way to healing 16
"The Detox Diet" looks at lifestyle changes as the key to health.
Abnormally good food in Normal Heights 18
Our restaurant reviewer visits Jyoti Bihanga in Norma Heights.
It's Your Garden! by Laurie Cohen
Building Your Soil 15
San Diego Earth Day
EarthFair '97: a huge success, a different view than the San Diego
Union Tribune... 19
Observations from the soul by Minister Masada
Anti-Ecological Man? 22
Departments
New Think: the cartoon by Robert Ocegueda <bocegueda@tmisnet.com>
"The Pickle We're In" 10
May calendar of Earth-Friendly Events 20
Please visit www.sdearthtimes.com
------------------------------
End of GreenYes Digest V97 #100
******************************