GreenYes Digest V97 #119

GreenYes Mailing List and Newsgroup (
Fri, 22 Jan 1999 17:12:28 -0500

GreenYes Digest Sun, 25 May 97 Volume 97 : Issue 119

Today's Topics:
Asphalt Shingle Recycling
Cellulose Insulation
Fwd: Zero Waste down under
GreenYes Digest V97 #118 (2 msgs)
Recycling Stealth Attack (2 msgs)
Some 80,000 industrial are unregulated
URGENT: Write or attend hearing on S.D. curbside recycling June 4

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: Sat, 24 May 1997 10:53:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: "William P. McGowan" <>
Subject: Asphalt Shingle Recycling


This question seemed to be targeted directly at me, so here goes. In
July of this year, a firm that I represent as sourcing coordinator will
begin production of a totally recycled-content asphault shingle product.
The company's name is Inovate (one "n") and they are based in South Gate,
a city which adjoins the commercial andn industrial center of Los
Angeles. the owners are two guys who made their first fortune making a
product known as the "Dura-ridge," an angled composite shingle that is
placed on the ridge of roof-lines and revolutionized the composite
shingle market when it was introduced in 1977.

The new Inovate product can only use tear-off from totally asphault
roofs--the rocks have to be "spudded" off the surface, and the tolerace
of wood into the product, while acceptable, is relative low--less than 5%
of the total material recycled. What happens in our process is that old
shingles are shredded and then dropped into a steam jacket, where the
asphault melts and becomes a sticky, gooey substance that is then
extruded, formed, and cut in a continuous process. mGiven the
Dura-ridge's market share when the patent lapsed last summer, Inovate
hopes to begin licensing this process sometime in 1998.

If you have any questions, you can call me in my office at 805-240-3448.

Bill McGowan
Rincon Recycling

On Tue, 20 May 1997, Joshua Reiser wrote:

> Does anyone have any information, anecdotes, and/or ideas about how
> to recycle asphalt roofing shingles? Any help would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Joshua Reiser
> St. Louis County Department of Health
> Office of the Solid Waste Coordinator


Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 10:42:18 -0500
From: Jim McNelly <>
Subject: Cellulose Insulation

Cloutier, Chris wrote:
> With all the trouble that Minnesota recyclers are having moving #6 ONP
> and mixed paper in general, my office is begining to bandy around
> alternate market options. One that springs immediately to mind is
> cellulose insulation.
> Any other suggestions for viable, local markets for mixed paper would
> also be appreciated.

Hi Chris,

There is an obvious and immediate "market" for all grades of paper in
the composting industry. I posted a note to this group several months
ago suggesting that the recycling industry form a "commodity coalition"
with the composting industry and begin moving vast tonnages of paper
into the humus market in order to drive up prices for the higher grades
of paper.

We both know that many, many truckloads of ONP, fiberboard and
corrugated are being landfilled in Minnesota right now due to the lack
of "markets" in the recycling infrastructure. The question comes down
to how much the recycling industry is willing to pay for paper to be
composted vs pay to have it recycled. I suggest that composting paper
is, in many cases, less costly than recycling, and that the primary
barrier is perceptual, not economic. By that I mean that there is a
prevailing attitude among many environmentalists that promoting
sustainable communities through enhancing topsoil is lower on the
environmental hierarchy than recycling paper fiber back into fiber.

My position is that neither use is "better" than the other in the
context of a full life cycle analysis, and that economics, not politics,
should determine the fate of paper in the solid waste stream.

The Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance just awarded three
grants to the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota for source separated
organics composting. Under a "Sustainable Community" heading, the grant
also calls for "low tech" collection and demonstration and
"environmental education". The program officially begins the third week
of June and the compostability of paper will be one area under
evaluation. Are you interested in participating?

Jim~ McNelly       
NaturTech Composting Systems, Inc.   320-253-6255 
Information on Composting and Sustainable Futures
The Humusphere           HTTP://


Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 20:15:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Subject: Fwd: Zero Waste down under

--------------------- Forwarded message: From: To: Date: 97-05-24 07:05:24 EDT

Hi There!

You write:

> I do hope to discuss with yourself and others the possibility of > establishing an international support group and beyond.

> Personally, I think our progress is unstoppable. > I think it was Albert Einstein who said: "Nothing is as powerful as an > idea whose time has come." > Looking foward to it. > Kindest regards, > Gerard. >

Not only do I say "Bravo" to you, but also wish you to know that here in the Rainbow Nation, you will find many supporters - I have been trying to drive the Zero Waste option for a while, and finally believe that I am making some headway. Do keep me informe, if possible. Many thanx for the work for our planet.

Kind Regards Mr. Muna Lakhani CATALYST

Cellphone:082-416-9160 Cellfax: 082-131-416-9160 e-mail: 28 Currie Road - Durban - 4001 - South Africa Phone: +27-31-20-28-291


Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 12:08:15 +0100 From: (Mary Appelhof) Subject: GreenYes Digest V97 #118

I have two possibilities for you:

We produced a set of 9 recycling labels printed vertically on lightly-varnished paper stock (to avoid manufacture and use of plastic). Labels include: Milk Jugs, Newspapers, Beverage, Junk Mail, Aluminum, Tin Cans, Glass, Trash, and Worm Food. We believe that source separation leads to higher value recycleables for market, and that people will take more responsibility for their own waste if it is convenient for them to source separate.

They are packaged in recycled chipboard with a photograph of the labels in use on common wastepaper baskets. The package also has information about recycling including such as:

"Recycling paper saves forests. Paper products use about 35% of the world's commercial wood harvest.

Junk mail wastes resources Because junk mail contains plastic, adhesives, and clay-coated stock, it is recycled as low-grad mixed paper. To receive less junk mail, ask the Direct Mail Marketing Association, 6 East 43rd Steet, New York, NY 10017, to remove your name from lists sold by the major list brokers.

Organic kitchen waste contaminates recyclables. Keep other recyclables clean by using earthworms to convert organic kitchen waste into nutrient-rich potting soil. To learn more, read Worms Eat My Garbage by Mary Appelhof.

Recycle more today than you did yesterday. Recycle more tomorrow than you did today."

The inside package has two word-find puzzles about recycling and the environment.

I am sending you a set via snail mail. I have approximately 5000 sets available.

I am not interested distributing these one or two sets at a time, but potential purchasers of the whole lot are welcome to request a sample set.

The other suggestion for your facility labeling is Kewanna Screen Printing Inc. in Indiana. 1-800-348-2454 who offer recycling, refuse decals of all types.

Hope this helps.

Mary Appelhof Flowerfield Enterprises 10332 Shaver Road Kalamazoo, MI 49024 616-327-0108, FAX 616-327-7009 website:

> >Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 08:05:39 -0700 >From: (David L. Stitzhal) >Subject: pedestrian request > >Grettings fellow listers, > >I have a simple request, rather pedestrian, given the wonderful discourse >normally flowing through these channels. Does anyone out there have a >catalogue or 1-800 # for a supplier of recycling decals, stickers, signs >and emblems. I am helping a huge, new multi-use facility put together >their recycling program and they are looking for signage that will a) go in >each tenant's space, b) go by each recycling compactor and public storage >area, and c) go in public spaces to inform customers about management >efforts. Thanks in advance for your help. > >Cheers, > >David > >David Stitzhal, MRP >President >Full Circle Environmental, Inc. >8355 Wolcott Avenue South >Seattle, WA 98118 >206-723-0528 >206-723-2452 fax > > >------------------------------ > >End of GreenYes Digest V97 #118 >******************************


Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 14:45:00 -0500 From: RecycleWorlds <> Subject: GreenYes Digest V97 #118

------ =_NextPart_000_01BC6851.1FC560C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 5/24 Carolyn Chase asked with regard to airline recycling:

"Does anyone have a summary of what carriers and/or airports are doing = in the way of recycling. USAIR didn't seem to be even separating the = aluminum, which American and Southwest do."

Due to my proximity to their Twin Cities hub, I fly Northwest mostly, = and have asked them. They purport that they have sorting lines in their = hubs where they sort through the mixed waste black plastic bags. The = stewards did not know, however, whether they do so for anything more = than aluminum.

The airport where I recall see the best program was Boston's where they = have three bin canasters almost as frequently arrayed on the concourses = as trash cans.

Peter Anderson ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC6851.1FC560C0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64


------ =_NextPart_000_01BC6851.1FC560C0--


Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 09:55:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Frank Ackerman <> Subject: Recycling Stealth Attack

I would like to recommend that libelous personal attacks be prohibited on greenyes, or on other discussion groups that purport to have honest intellectual exchanges. My record of publication speaks for itself (and what I said in New Zealand is no different from what I've said in the U.S.); those who choose to read my attacks on the anti-recycling movement, and conclude that I secretly agree with the anti-recyclers, or that I am a spy, flak, or mole for a shadowy anti-recycling conspiracy, should probably look for other discussion groups where they can exchange information about the U.N.'s black helicopters taking over the United States.

What does Donald Knapp aim to achieve through character assassination? Why does Bill Sheehan of the Sierra Club feel this is a reasonable activity to engage in? Is this an organizational position of the Sierra Club, or just one errant individual? I don't think THEY are part of a shadowy conspiracy, but I think they have failed to think clearly about their purposes and tactics in attacking others. Greenyes has appeared to serve a useful purpose, but if this continues, it may be necessary to look for a non-libel-oriented alternative discussion group. Does Zero Waste advocacy mean Zero Respect for those who have intellectual disagreements with you?


Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 11:24:36 -0700 (PDT) From: "William P. McGowan" <> Subject: Recycling Stealth Attack

Regarding Frank Ackerman's reply to the Sierra Club tretise--I am preparing my own response to the article which was posted on the list by a member of the Sierra Club--and as a registered, spy, flak, AND anti-recycler (who happens to have made his living recycling for ten years)I can only say that I agree with Mr. Ackerman's general commens.

Soecific issues will beaddressed in a lter posting

Bill McGowan Rincon Recycling UCSB


Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 23:32:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Subject: Some 80,000 industrial are unregulated

Susan, There may be some sludge in a small town somewhere that is free from dangerous chemicals and can be used on croplands but from our research it would be dangerous to assume that any sludge is safe, even if it meets EPA standards. What can be done about it is problematical. It is probably too toxic to put anywhere, except in a hazardous waste dump (maybe not even there). But it certainly shouldn't be used on croplands.

Jeanne Davies


Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 14:57:04 -0700 From: Carolyn Chase <> Subject: URGENT: Write or attend hearing on S.D. curbside recycling June 4

Please attend a hearing to express your views on the future of curbside recycling in the City of San Diego! If you can't attend please write to the Director of Env Services as indicated below:

Wed. June 4th 6-8pm at the City of SD Env Services Dept Bldg in Kearny Mesa

9601 Ridgehaven Ct. ( From I-15 take Balboa exit west to the first light at Viewridge, turn south on Viewridge to Ridgehaven, turn left on Ridgehaven to the end of the cul de sac)



Currently about only 82,000 homes or about 30% of single family homes in San Diego receive weekly curbside recycling. A community advisory committee was formed by the City Manager to evaluate options for the future of curbside recycling (I am a member). Formore info on the hearing call 492-5010.

The options include expanding to all residents, keeping the status quo, or elimination and everything in between. Right now, the consensus is leaning strongly toward complete elimination of the CIty's curbside program.

This is being driven by two main factors: equity and cost. This can also be viewed as "we'd really like to recycle, but...."

It is deemed unfair to keep the current system but "unaffordable" to expand it. City Council members are loath to have the City offer the service for a fee and they don't want to make recycling mandatory either. (the "m" word is politically taboo in the current political climate). There seemed to be some folks that would be willing to ban certain items from the landfill, as long as they were free to choose how people did their recycling. This makes it difficult to establish recycling pick-up routes that can make money and is essentially how you go about implementing a mandatory system.

It is not strictly true that the money does not exist to fund the program. The solid waste system is being used to fund many, many non-solid-waste related services via a $10 per ton tax that has been levied on the materials going into the Miramer landfill. This money is siphoned off into the General Fund and not used to divert materials from the landfill or support other solid waste solutions such as curbside. The question is the choices that are made.

Shouldn't the moneys that are being generated by solid waste be used to help expand capacity and not be siphoned off for other City Services?

IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND please send your comment in a letter to:

Director, Environmental Servcies Dept, 9601 Ridgehaven Ct. Suite 210 SD CA 92123-1636

Any questions, send 'em to me.

Carolyn Chase, Editor, San Diego Earth Times, Please visit ;-)

Tel: (619)272-7423 (SDET) FAX: (619)272-2933 email: P.O. Box 9827 / San Diego CA 92169

'You've got to conserve what you can't replace' ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Every citizen is involved in politics; it's just that some people do politics, some have it done to them."


End of GreenYes Digest V97 #119 ******************************