Today's Topics:
GreenYes Digest V98 #40
Looking for gaylord box supplier
March 5 Workshop on Pay-As-You-Throw
Nova Scotia Compostable Organics Landfill Ban (2 msgs)
Re: Smart Office
refillable bottles
Winter Olympics Ecological Impacts
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:98/42
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 13:02:30 -0500
From: "Cheri Kennedy"<clkenne@nswc.navy.mil>
Subject: GreenYes Digest V98 #40
I wanted to thank everyone who responded to my question about the weight of
sludge! I knew you guys would have an answer for me! We have to report
everything in pounds or tons for our annual Solid Waste Report. And the
guys at the sewage treatment plant looked at me like I was crazy for asking
them to weigh a bucket of it!! HeeHee! Below is the answer I finally
decided to use because it had references!!!
Thank you Kenneth!
@-}Cheri Kennedy
Solid Waste Program Manager
Naval Surface Warfare Center
Dahlgren Virginia
540-653-2342
Author: Kenneth Zeier at ~cityhall
City of Woodland, CA
Date: 2/13/98 7:19 AM
Priority: Normal
TO: Rebecca Brown
Subject: Re: Sludge Question
------------------------------- Message Contents
-------------------------------
HI.
One must state whether they are talking of dewatered sludge, or stuff
that is sitting on the bottom of a reactor.
"The sludge resulting from wastewater treatment operations and
processes is usually in the form of a liquid or semisolid liquid tha
typically contains from 0.25 to 12 percent solids by weight, depending
on the operations and processes used." Wastewater Engr., 3rd ed.
Metcalf & Eddy, page 765. McGraw and Hill. 1991.
Table 12-7, of the same reference states various specific gravities of
sludge for different treatment processes. Sludge from primary
sedimentation has an s.g. of 1.02, while that from an aerated lagoon
has an s.g. of 1.01. These are book values.
Finally, we have:
8.34 lbs./gallon X s.g. of sludge = lbs. / gal. , sludge
or
8.34 lbs. / gal. X 1.02 = 8.5 lbs. / gallon, sludge.
Answer: 8.5 lbs./gallon of sludge, approx. 95% water:5% solids
If the sludge is dewatered, to say 50% solids, then the weight will be
different.
regards,
Kenneth Zeier
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 18:25:26 -0800
From: Myra Nissen <myracycl@inreach.com>
Subject: Looking for gaylord box supplier
We are looking for a bulk supplier for gaylord boxs, new or used.
Please reply to Andrew at ssutta@inreach.com, or through our web page
http://www.sutta.com, or give him a call at 510-873-8777.
Thank you so much.
Myra
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 16:18:47 -0800
From: Global Futures <info@globalff.org>
Subject: March 5 Workshop on Pay-As-You-Throw
PAY-AS-YOU-THROW
Creating Incentives to Reduce Waste:
Implementing Pay-As-You-Throw in California
A Practical Workshop for Local Government Officials,
City Council Members, and Haulers
March 5, 1998
12 noon to 5:15 pm
(including lunch)
at the
Burbank Central Library in Burbank, CA
Presented by:
Global Futures Foundation
and
EPA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PAY~AS~YOU~THROW
Pay~As~You~Throw (PAYT) (also known as unit-based
pricing, or variable rates) is a municipal solid waste
management system under which residents pay for
municipal waste management services per unit of waste
collected rather than through a fixed fee or general funds.
Many communities in California and across the country have
already adopted PAYT programs. Studies indicate that
these communities achieve significant reductions in waste
landfilled and increases in recycling. They are finding
that PAYT:
~provides a direct economic incentive to reduce the
amount of waste landfilled
~promotes recycling and composting
~increases awareness of environmental issues, and
~improves the overall effectiveness of waste
management systems.
Looking for new ways to meet the AB 939 goal for 2000? If
your community is considering PAYT or is just implementing
PAYT, this workshop can help identify why and how to go
about developing a PAYT program that really works to
promote residential waste reduction and fits your
community's needs. Our panel of experts is involved in all
aspects of PAYT planning and implementation. Brief
presentations and plenty of time for questions and answers
will help you learn what you really need to know to
effectively implement Pay~As~You~Throw (PAYT):
~How to gain acceptance for PAYT among politicians
and community members
~Implications of Proposition 218 on solid waste fees
~Program design: container types, automated
collection, overcoming potential problems
~Rate setting, and the political realities of setting
rates that create incentives to reduce waste
~Measuring program success
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Panelists
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ Lynn Scarlett, Reason Foundation
~ Lisa Skumatz, Skumatz Economic Research Associates
~ Mike Silva, CEO, Athens Services
~ Mark Harmon, Integrated Waste Manager, City of
Claremont
~ Joe Delaney, Solid Waste Operations Manager, City of
Santa Monica
~ John Gibson, Gibson Economics
~ Moderators: Bill Shireman and Wendy Pratt, Global
Futures Foundation
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Agenda
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Noon-1 pm Lunch and Speakers: Introductions and
gaining support for PAYT
1-2:15 Program design; technical issues; addressing
potential problems
2:15-2:30 Break
2:30-3:45 Rate setting and implementation; political
realities of rate-setting
3:45-4:45 Measuring results and improving the success
of existing PAYT programs
4:45-5:15 Summary and Follow-up Q&A
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Time and Location
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Workshop will take place Thursday, March 5 from 12 noon
to 5:15 pm at the Burbank Central Library, 110 North
Glenoaks Blvd. Lunch is included in the $20 workshop fee.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Special Morning
Rate-Setting Session
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
John Gibson of Gibson Economics in Seattle, one of the
afternoon speakers, has developed a software program to
help communities set rates for PAYT. The software has
been used by cities such as San Jose and Seattle. In a
special session, John will be available for the morning of
March 5 to work through his program with a representatives
from a few communities. Space is limited. If you are
interested, please contact Wendy Pratt.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CRRA Morning Workshop
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The PAYT workshop directly follows a CRRA workshop at
the same location: Reuse and Recycling of Electronics and
Appliances. This workshop is designed to highlight model
takeback programs by manufacturers and retailers, and new
programs being developed by local governments to help
address these needs. This workshop is targeted to local
government recycling coordinators, manufacturers, retailers,
reuse and recycling companies and others who are
interested in expanding the reuse and recycling of these
products. For more information or to register, call:
916-652-4450 or http://www.crra.com. The cost of is $45 for
CRRA members and $75 for non-members.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This workshop is made possible through funding from the
United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 9.
For more information, contact Wendy Pratt at Global
Futures Foundation: 916-486-5999 or wbpratt@aol.com
S I G N U P N O W
Reply to this message, fax/916-486-5990 (credit cards only),
call/916-486-5999 or mail us with completed registration information to:
Global Futures Foundation -
PAYT Workshop, 801 Crocker Road, Sacramento, CA
95864.
Name:
Affiliation:
Address:
City:
State/Prov:
ZIP/Postal Code:
Phone:
Fax:
Email:
Please mail completed form to Global Futures Foundation -
PAYT Workshop, 801 Crocker Road, Sacramento, CA
95864. Or fax signups to 916-486-5990, email to
wbpratt@aol.com.
Level of community interest in PAYT:
O Program in place
O Program being developed
O Considering PAYT
O Solid Waste staff interested in PAYT
O Local officials interested
O Community groups interested
O Haven't considered it
O Other _________________________________.
Any issues or concerns you would especially like to hear
about?
O Generating support
O Rate setting
O Costs
O Franchise issues
O Illegal disposal
O Waste reduction potential
O Measuring results
O Other _________________________________.
Payment Options:
O Check for $20 to Global Futures Foundation
O Payment due at workshop
O Charge my credit card (please circle which one):
Visa MasterCard
Card #
Expires
Cardholder Name
Signature
*********************************************************
Global Futures Foundation
801 Crocker Road
Sacramento, CA 95864 USA
(916) 486-5999 voice (916) 486-5990 fax
http://www.globalff.org
*********************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 17:23:45 -0500
From: "Bill Sheehan" <bill_sheehan@mindspring.com>
Subject: Nova Scotia Compostable Organics Landfill Ban
[Forwarded from Zero Waste America]
Nova Scotia Compostable Organics Landfill Ban
Solid Waste-Resource Management in Nova Scotia
"Nova Scotia Too Good To Waste"
1996-97 Status Report
http://www.gov.ns.ca/envi/wasteman/status.htm
(EXCERPT)
6. Composting
More than one third of all our garbage is organic material such as food
scraps, leaves, grass clippings and garden waste. Organics, when they are
exposed to water, form a liquid called leachate. Leachate picks up
contaminants from the other garbage and can pollute neighbouring water
resources if it escapes from the landfill site. Keeping organics out of
landfills is one way to reduce environmental risk.
Each region of the province is developing a plan to divert organics from
disposal. In most areas, this will mean that businesses and households will be
separating organics from regular garbage so that it can be composted at a
centralized facility. Once turned into compost, it becomes a valuable resource
that can be applied to soils as natural fertilizer.
The Department of the Environment has banned compostable organics from
landfills after November 30, 1998. This is a progressive step that places Nova
Scotia among the leaders in waste management in North America. No other
province in Canada has implemented such a ban.
How are we doing?
Already there are two central composting facilities; one in Colchester and the
other in Lunenburg. Both systems process the full range of organics and are
enclosed "in vessel" composting facilities with filters to control the release
of odours. Together, these facilities diverted almost 5,300 tonnes of organics
in 1996-97.
Halifax Regional Municipality has plans to construct two centralized
composting facilities, the first beginning in the fall of 1997.
Other areas such as the Western Region have plans to meet the organics
disposal ban.
Back yard composting programs have also been implemented in many areas of Nova
Scotia. This method is effective in managing some organic wastes, and allows
the home owner to close the waste loop by making useable compost on their own
property.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 10:08:13 +0100
From: Ruzena Gajdos <ruzgaj@usa.net>
Subject: Nova Scotia Compostable Organics Landfill Ban
Up to 85 % of all our garbage is of organic origin. Solid organic waste
when mixed with human and animal excreta can be converted by microorganisms
to valuable products in local (small or large), efficient, hygienic and
user friendly bioconversion systems. Organic solid and liquid organic waste
is renewable raw material.
It is wonderful that effort is made to divert organics from disposal and
incinerators. Only biological transformation processes can lead to
environmentally save organic waste management.
For successful bioconversion of organic waste are needed novel systems for
a) collection, b) processing and c) application of products (for example
biogas and biofertilizers).
Ruzena Gajdos
PS
Is it possible to receive more information about "enclosed "in vessel"
composting facilities with filters"?
How much compost was produced from 5,300 tonnes organics? Can you describe
quality of the compost? What is cost per tonne compost (or how costly is
treatment of one tonne organics)? How expensive are transports? What about
pollution caused by transports?
At 17:23 1998-02-17 -0500, you wrote:
>[Forwarded from Zero Waste America]
>
>
>Nova Scotia Compostable Organics Landfill Ban
>
>Solid Waste-Resource Management in Nova Scotia
>"Nova Scotia Too Good To Waste"
>1996-97 Status Report
>
>http://www.gov.ns.ca/envi/wasteman/status.htm
>
>(EXCERPT)
>
>6. Composting
>
>More than one third of all our garbage is organic material such as food
>scraps, leaves, grass clippings and garden waste. Organics, when they are
>exposed to water, form a liquid called leachate. Leachate picks up
>contaminants from the other garbage and can pollute neighbouring water
>resources if it escapes from the landfill site. Keeping organics out of
>landfills is one way to reduce environmental risk.
>
>Each region of the province is developing a plan to divert organics from
>disposal. In most areas, this will mean that businesses and households
will be
>separating organics from regular garbage so that it can be composted at a
>centralized facility. Once turned into compost, it becomes a valuable
resource
>that can be applied to soils as natural fertilizer.
>
>The Department of the Environment has banned compostable organics from
>landfills after November 30, 1998. This is a progressive step that places
Nova
>Scotia among the leaders in waste management in North America. No other
>province in Canada has implemented such a ban.
>
>How are we doing?
>
>Already there are two central composting facilities; one in Colchester and
the
>other in Lunenburg. Both systems process the full range of organics and are
>enclosed "in vessel" composting facilities with filters to control the
release
>of odours. Together, these facilities diverted almost 5,300 tonnes of
organics
>in 1996-97.
>
>Halifax Regional Municipality has plans to construct two centralized
>composting facilities, the first beginning in the fall of 1997.
>
>Other areas such as the Western Region have plans to meet the organics
>disposal ban.
>
>Back yard composting programs have also been implemented in many areas of
Nova
>Scotia. This method is effective in managing some organic wastes, and allows
>the home owner to close the waste loop by making useable compost on their own
>property.
>
>
>
>
*********************************
Ruzena Gajdos AgrD
Visirvagen 8
246 33 Loddekopinge
Sweden
Phone: +46 46 709317.
Phone/Fax: +46 40 301103
Mobile phone: +46 707 331120
E-mail: ruzgaj@usa.net
*********************************
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 18:28:35 EST
From: Jango@aol.com
Subject: Re: Smart Office
Responding to:
>>Can anyone tell me the correct address for the 'Smart Office' reference
>>given a few days ago? The given address (http://www.smartoffice.com)
>>doesn't work for me.
For what it's worth, I went to the Smart Office site last week and tooled
around. Some good stuff worth visiting. The web address you gave above
was right so I'm not sure what the problem is. I just went there myself
and no one's home (by the way, they need to come up with better graphics
than the old text based error in tracking down your address
message...like Alfred E. Neumann getting ready to shoot his computer or
something).
David Biddle
7366 Rural Lane
Philadelphia, PA 19119
215-247-2974 (voice and fax)
jango@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 17:33:59 -0500
From: David Saphire <saphire@informinc.org>
Subject: refillable bottles
In response to recent postings re: refillable bottles. Back in 1994 INFORM
published "Case Reopened: Reassessing Refillable Bottles" It includes
detailed analysis of the environmental comparisons between one-way and
refillable beverage containers. also chapters on the use of refillables in
the US past in present, reasons for their demise, obstacles to their
return, where they are still used successfully and under what conditions,
and policies that might promote their use. Also two case studies of
companies that were using refillables back in 1994. We looked at the beer,
soft-drink, and milk industries. As far as I know this is the most
comprehensive report on the subject in recent years (Container Recycling
Institute in D.C has also done some excellent work on the subject,
especially on the use of refillables and policies abroad). Visit INFORM's
website www.informinc.org for a copy of the executive summary or to order
the book or call me (David Saphire 212-361-24400 x236) to discuss any of
these issues.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 09:50:35 PST8PDT
From: "Mark Kennedy" <kennedym@skynet3.csus.edu>
Subject: Winter Olympics Ecological Impacts
Hi All,
Here are some interesting winter olympic impacts that are not in the
news. The report was forwarded to me by my friend Kimiharu To.
Kimiharu and I first met at Humboldt State University.
During his stay there he became active with the
Campus Recycling Program, completing one term as the program's
Director. He later got involved with the Bill Devall, one of the
founders of Deep Ecology. He now lives in Japan and continues
his work with the Deep Ecology Movement.
I have forwarded this message to the above recycling list serves,
because I feel our movement can have a direct impact of these types
of public events. Please inform your local media of these findings.
Mark Kennedy
-------------------------------------------------------------------
GUARD FOX WATCH NETWORK
STATEMENT OF CONCERN REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL IMPACT
OF THE NAGANO WINTER OLYMPICS
____________________________________________________
The ecological impact of the upcoming Winter Olympics in
Nagano has become an urgent concern of local residents,
environmentally-conscious citizens of Japan, and a growing
number of people throughout the world. The present measures
for "coexistence with nature" do not remotely satisfy reasonable
standards for protection against many threats to life systems
posed by the Games. In addition, there are important priorities
for long-term sustainability in the region that have not been
addressed.
Land, highway and other development for staging the Games
has already inflicted high ecological costs. Massive further
damage will soon occur through sheer numbers of attendees
at events which will adversely affect air, water, soil, and
ecosystems in significant ways.
Although they are only two weeks long in duration, the legacy
of these last Winter Games before the 21st Century will be
the greatest ecological disaster in Nagano's bioregional history.
The theme of "Respect for the Beauty and Bounty of Nature"
is an empty promise that totally fails to adequately address
the seriousness of this situation.
GUARD FOX WATCH will observe the negative impacts of the
Games and assess their ecological damage. We will issue
peridodic warnings about particularly dangerous activities in
order to prevent their reoccurrence, and provide ongoing
reports over the two week period. We will also propose
guidelines to avoid the negative impacts of future Olympics and
other large sports events and suggest beneficial ways to create
the means for future sustainability when they are held.
NOBODY WINS THE GAMES IF NATURE LOSES!
Representitives:
Peter Berg (Northern America)
Kimiharu To (Japan)
Tel./fax 0261-23-7302
E-mail kimiharu@po.cnet-nf.ne.jp
GUARD FOX WATCH STATEMENT II - February 14, 1998
__________________________________________________________
After one week of the Nagano Winter Games, it is obvious that
some outrageous ecological impacts must be stopped
immediately:
1) Use of salt and other chemicals to clear ice and snow at
event sites and to keep major roadways open 24 hours
a day must cease at the present huge scale. There are
many other means to effectively treat ice and snow
that don't involve such highly destructive
consequences for ground water, rice field soil, and
towns downstream.
2) Trash burning at lodges, restaurants, and town
garbage facilities must be forbidden for the remainder
of the Games due to excessive air pollution such as
presently occurs in Hakuba Valley and other places.
3) Personal automobiles must be banned on the roads
near event sites where they cause traffic
jams with engines running up to half an hour that
contribute significantly to acute current air pollution.
4) "Recycling" bins at event sites actually recycle nothing
in themselves but provide an inexpensive means to
sort trash using audience assistance. One bin choice
proudly announces "burnables" which eventually
contribute to air pollution. Other choices (especially
"plastic") may not be sent to the most ecological
recycling destinations. Recycling processes must be
immediately disclosed, reviewed and modified.
GUARD FOX WATCH has established two main areas for
determining ecological impacts that need to be assessed
for future remediation, restoration and reparations for
damages: a) natural systems of the Nagano Bioregion, and
b) local human ecology.
Natural systems that are most obviously affected are:
1) Water. Snow is handled with shovels and bulldozers
but it isn't dirt, it's water. Snow melts into local soil,
water drains and channels, eventually ending up in
agricultural irrigation water and rivers. It carries
along everything dropped on it including
highway salt, snow-bonded auto exhaust chemicals
and incidental wastes such as tire rubber, grease,
antifreeze, and battery acid, as well as all forms of
noxious litter thrown away by hundreds of thousands
of people participating in the Games or attending
them.
2) Soil. Erosion from building 115 kilometers of new
roads for the Winter Olympics will be extensive in the
steep and geologically sensitive Nagano mountains.
3) Ecosystems, Native plant and animal communities
have been cut open with new roads and disrupted or
destroyed by clearcutting forests and bulldozing land
for construction. Animals are presently frightened
away by night lighting and crowd noise during their
most difficult survival season.
Human ecology impacts include:
1) Economic displacement. Any employment of local
people and increase in Nagano business
attributable to the Games is temporary. Sufficient
jobs in regionally sustainable industries are still
lacking. Burdensome taxes incurred by
roadbuilding and construction for the Games
is inequitably assigned to Nagano residents alone.
2) Garbage. Hakuba alone is slated to handle 87
metric tons of additional waste because of the
Olympics (a figure that will undoubtedly be
exceeded). Garbage burning is an inappropriate
method of disposal even under ordinary conditions.
3) Water supplies. Usual uses were vastly multiplied.
Supplies are diverted for human use from native
ecosystems.
4) Energy. Increases in unsustainable fossil fuel
energy use in. Air pollution by autos.
GUARD FOX WATCH recommendations for dealing with the
devastating ecological aftermath of the Olympics for natural
systems are to neutralize the roadside and watershed effects of
chemical pollution, undertake thorough erosion monitoring and
control, and restore and maintain native plant and animal
communities. In order to repair damage to human ecology and
create a sustainable future for Nagano, we urge shifting the costs
of construction to organizers and sponsors of the Games,
instituting genuine and thorough recycling programs, developing
energy sources that are renewable rather than polluting fossil
fuels or dangerous nuclear power, converting all
water systems to recycle gray water, and awarding subsidies for
new businesses and jobs to create these sustainable alternatives.
NOBODY WINS THE GAMES IF NATURE LOSES!
Representatives: Peter Berg (North America)
Kimiharu To (Japan)
Tel./fax 0261-23-7302
E-mail kimiharu@po.cnet-nf.ne.jp
GUARD FOX WATCH UPDATE 4
__________________________________________________________
cDear Friends
The symposium on environmental impacts of the Winter Games was held
yesterday (2/14) in Nagano City under
the auspices of "We Don't Need The Olympics," a citizens' group who
previously opposed holding the Winter Olympics here.
It was only attended by about fifty people including a half-dozen
local and international media representatives. Although the original "No
Olympics" group served well and developed remarkable research about
Olympics-related problems of many kinds, it lost that battle and needs to
focus now on what should be done in the post-Olympics atmosphere which is
likely in hindsight to be much more critical of the Games.
It was the first opportunity to present Guard Fox Watch Statement II with
its immediate demands to stop over-salting roads and event sites, cease
garbage burning, forbid autos near event sites, and desist from using
"burnables" as an option on recycling containers at events. I gave a talk
that started with those and went on to report some findings by Kim To and
myself (Kim interpreted for me but was introduced as a collaborating
mainstay). Ecological impacts were divided between those on natural systems
and those involving human ecology. Water, soil and ecosystems were the
natural systems concerns with chemicals (including snow-bound auto exhaust)
entering the watershed, erosion from extensive roadbuilding, and
destruction of plant and animal habitats as the main problems. Human
ecology included economic displacement by the temporary Olympics boom with
accompanying high roadbuilding taxes,
huge garbage problems, overuse of water diverted from ecosystems, and
immense energy consumption.
Kim and I researched some of these problems in Hakuba by making trips to
municipal and Olympic sites in freezing weather. Nobody from the Nagano
Olympics Organizing Committee (NAOC) had gotten to them first so the waste
burning plant manager
and sewage department chief were extremely
chatty. Hakuba alone was slated to receive at least 87 metric tons of
burnable garbage from event venues and we calculated that as at least 500
tons from all places that could be directly attributed to the Olympics.
Read: 500 tons converted into
chemical-laden smoke in the Nagano air. A figure for sewage
from the ski jump area that is going into a municipal line will be
easy to obtain and compare with pre-Olympic levels within a few
weeks. NAOC did get to the highway snow-clearing agency before us because
the otherwise good-natured manager told me after three separate attempts to
get an answer that he was explicitly told NOT to release any information
about increases in salt and other chemicals used to clear snow in order to
keep main roads
related to the Olympics open 24 hours a day regardless of need or
conditions (and at the detriment of clearing village roads).
We have made a rough estimate that the increase is three to five
times normal. Our one trip to an actual Olympics event (Nordic combined ski
jump) was made with scalped tickets at one-fifth the price and became an
opportunity to examine this venue
and overflowing crowd of 60,000 or so. Salt bags were piled everywhere for
massive use on walkways and side roads.
Recycling bins were actually only collection points for audience-gathered
wastes with no indication of how they would be
recycled (readers in the know will recogize that this is a point
of hot contention since many commercial "recycling" destinations
have questionable ecological value) except for the designation "burnables"
on one-quarter of them which translates into "air
dumped." Hakuba Valley's air seen from the stadium was already yellow-gray
with combined trash-burning and exhaust pollution, when like dust following
an exploding bomb, the waste-burning plant released a cloud of an even
darker yellow-gray color. The crowd was really just an enormous studio
audience for the event which had a TV screen three stories high, speakers
on six storey buildings, and construction crane-type appartus for cameras
hovering over the scene. It is obvious that the Olympics are primarilly a
media event for several reasons such as their remoteness even for people in
the vicinity and difficulty to observe, but what is unnerving is the
audience consciousness of being little more than visual and sound effects
for TV intercutting with athletes. Crowds cheer, honk horns, and salaam to
sports stars as though cued by what they imagine (correctly I'm afraid) to
be TV directions.
Guard Fox Watch's statement concluded with recommendations for complete
monitoring of ecological impacts, assessing damages, and seeking
reparations. It also pointed out sustainability-directed new activities
(Some readers have already made suggestions about these and we welcome
more.)
In any atmosphere but Nagano's state of Olympics hypnosis,
our report would have rated big media attention. I even threw in a scandal
possibility by mentioning NAOC's refusal to send us
documents pertaining to compliance with the International
Olympics Committee (IOC) environmental requirements, and suggested that
this was because several local enviornmental experts and groups which had
been critical of NAOC's
policies had been ignored, not included in discussions,
or stonewalled. IOC requires inclusion of all local environmental groups
and their opinions of the local organizing committee's efforts. Only
out-of-town Mainichi Shinbun interviewed me after the talk. This in itself
was exceptional because whereas
numerous foreign media representatives have interviewed Kim or myself, and
the English-language Japan Times that is mainly read by foreigners carried
a fairly big story about our cause (request a copy from Planet Drum
Foundation for regular mailing), practically no mainstream Japanese
newspapers or other media has covered rampant environmental criticism of
the Games. Kim's Japanese-language versions of our statements sent to the
national media here seem to be worthless. A reporter told me three weeks
ago in Tokyo that one of the biggest circulation newspapers had
specifically promised NAOC that it wouldn't print criticism of any kind
during the Games in return for exclusive local licensing privileges. Since
then I've heard this
story repeated enough times to rate it as common knowledge.
But there is an even greater conspiracy of silence that all media people
I've spoken to acknowledge as a fact of life here.. A fence
automatically goes up around any enterprise that is run by large
economic concerns to protect it from failure or negative repute.
Instead, critics are ignored, silenced, ostracized, or hurt in other ways.
It isn't a practice restricted to Japan, but it is widely thought to reach
a zenith here. The ecological impact
of the Games is for the time being outside this fence. My personal feeling
is that when they are over, the handling of the Olympics in social,
business, political, and ecological terms will unleash furor, scandals and
outrage that will blow down the fence like a typhoon. Guard Fox Watch''s
research, statements and recommendations may have their greatest value
during that long storm.
I leave for Tokyo tomorrow to present some talks and workshops for another
two weeks in Japan. Kim will produce Guard Fox Watch Statements in the
future and I'll help however I can. This may be the last e-mail update from
me because of the uncertainties of road life. Send copies of the Statements
out to friends and media sources if you can. Together we'll test the
effectiveness of this highly personalized news network. If you want to help
Guard Fox Watch's future efforts, contact Kim at his e-mail address on the
Statements or get in touch with Planet drum.
In diversity,
Peter Berg
<^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^>
California State University, Sacramento
Mark Kennedy
Conservation Coordinator 916-278-5801
6000 J Street 916-278-5796 FAX
Sacramento, CA 95818-6008 kennedym@csus.edu
"We are the source, now let's be the solution."
<^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^><^*^>
------------------------------
End of GreenYes Digest V98 #42
******************************