Today's Topics:
EPR, Take-Back Legislation, & Refundable-Deposits on Everything!
Life Cycle Analysis
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <greenyes@UCSD.Edu>
Send subscription requests to: <greenyes-Digest-Request@UCSD.Edu>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to postmaster@ucsd.edu.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loop-Detect: GreenYes:98/52
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 10:26:36 -0500
From: "David L. Turner" <Dturner@ysi.com>
Subject: EPR, Take-Back Legislation, & Refundable-Deposits on Everything!
>waste should be returned to the manufacturer - after all,
>the originator is in the absolutely best position to be
>able to re-use, recycling, or redesign a product.
Perhaps the originator is in a slightly better position
than the consumer, but not the best position by far. It is
likely to be true in the future, but now and for the near
future, it is not.
The recycling and reuse processes for most manufacturers
are not trivial. If a process involves making the material
to be recycled or using material or parts ONLY used for one
thing (e.g., a bottle) it is easier to recycle or reuse
than if the product has many parts and types of material in
it (e.g., a VCR).
We make electronic instruments which consist (primarily)
of a case and a printed circuit board. The cases have metal
and other parts in them that make them unacceptable to the
suppliers of plastic for reclamation. We cannot remove the
electronic parts and reuse them without testing them like
the manufacturer does. Reusing them without complete
testing is unacceptable and creating test equipment for
all the parts we use would require us to duplicate a large
portion of the electronics part manufacturer's factory. We
are left with a printed circuit board we can send for lead
reclamation and the rest to save for the future or
landfill. We are looking into a company that reclaims
electronic parts, and are hopeful that works out, but in
the end most of the material will be landfilled
Another issue is appearance. Just because a part is
reusable doesn't mean customers will be happy to buy
something with scratches and dents. We cannot reuse beaten
up instrument cases (we make environmental monitoring
equipment that gets LOTS of use outside in severe
environments).
We send scrap plastic parts back to our supplier for
regrinding when we can. They don't take everything
however, and if a plastics plant can't use it, we, a
manufacturing organization, will be even less likely to be
able to use it. We also reclaim metals, recycle paper and
cardboard, and are investigating recycling/reclamation of
electronic parts, but these practices have taken a long
time to implement. We are working on introducing the
process of Life Cycle Analysis in our designs, and I hope
and believe we can make the situation better with this.
This is a philosophical and cultural issue as well as a
logistical one. Customers must also change habits and
expectations. If we are to make reuse of parts acceptable,
consumers must be willing to accept used parts and
multicolored bottles. While I'm perfectly willing to do
this, I bet the bulk of the consuming population is not yet
ready. The manufacturers and the consumers of their
products are tied together in this.
Lest I come across as a money-grubbing capitalist pig dog,
let me assure you I fight for these ideas almost daily,
but the reality is that those who have the power to change
must be convinced to do so. Demands for them to change for
reasons they do not buy into will be seen as shrill
silliness instead of reasoned arguments. The anger and
condescension I read in many of these postings drives
people away rather than supporting a valid position.
Accusing a company or individual of being bad and demanding
immediate change won't advance the cause.
The problems are complex and there is no single or simple
solution. It is important to understand the limitations on
the people and systems currently in existence. Then we can
be in a better position to develop appropriate means for
affecting changes.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Profit is the result and reward of
doing things right and doing the right
things. Therein lies the balance.
Randy Berger, Comdial Corporation
Regards,
David Turner
YSI Safety Coordinator
1725 Brannum Lane
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387
Email: DTurner@YSI.com
Phone 1-937-767-1685 ext. 270
Facmetaphor: 1-937-767-9353
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 10:25:28 -0500
From: "David L. Turner" <Dturner@ysi.com>
Subject: Life Cycle Analysis
I am on a team working to introduce Life Cycle Analysis to
our design process and have been looking at Eco Scan
software as a tool to use. I am trying to find sources of
ecoscoring for epoxies to use since the Eco Scan database
has only things like metals and plastics. Does anyone have
any suggestions for scoring epoxies for this purpose?
Thanks in advance!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Profit is the result and reward of
doing things right and doing the right
things. Therein lies the balance.
Randy Berger, Comdial Corporation
Regards,
David Turner
YSI Safety Coordinator
1725 Brannum Lane
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387
Email: DTurner@YSI.com
Phone 1-937-767-1685 ext. 270
Facmetaphor: 1-937-767-9353
------------------------------
End of GreenYes Digest V98 #52
******************************