GreenYes Archives
[GreenYes Home] - [Thread Index] - [Date Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]

Re: [greenyes] Re: recycling?
Nick:

I don't understand that - why would anybody in their right mind be
ant-recycling??  Wow... did I get that right - rather toss it into an
incinerator versus recycling box?

Troy

Troy Glasner
eKOS Building Solutions
Tel: 613 821-6223
Fax: 613 821-5909
E: troy@no.address

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nicky Scott" <NScott@no.address>
To: "Pete Pasterz" <ppasterz@no.address>; <WYNNCALDER@no.address>;
<GRNSCH-L@no.address>
Cc: <greenyes@no.address>
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 5:49 AM
Subject: RE: [greenyes] Re: recycling?


> My next door neighbour who is an avid Telegraph reader (British right wing
> broadsheet) is always shoving antirecycling peices into my mailbox .
> You are right we must counter them vigourously.
> Britain is one of the few countries contemplating building incinerators -
> personally I think it's all about power and not wanting to devolve it back
> to the grassroots
> nick scott
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Pete Pasterz [SMTP:ppasterz@no.address]
> > Sent: 04 March 2003 17:41
> > To: WYNNCALDER@no.address; GRNSCH-L@no.address
> > Cc: greenyes@no.address
> > Subject: [greenyes] Re: recycling?
> >
> > So, what's new...the anti-recyclers exist in Europe, too.   And
> > conservative papers print anti-recycling articles [so do "liberal" ones,
> > like the John Tierney article in the NYT Magazine]
> >
> > I would hardly consider a former [conservative??] environment agency
> > staffer [like J. Winston Porter, formerly of USEPA]  , a director of
Keep
> > Sweden Tidy [correlary to Keep America Beautiful, a industry-funded
front
> > to diffuse producer responsibility], and managing directors of solid
waste
> > collection companies as "leading environmentalists and waste
> > campaigners...
> >
> > But, I'm not of the school which says we should dismiss and ignore these
> > attacks...I think we should take these head on, or risk these tales to
> > become truths...
> >
> > >>> WYNNCALDER@no.address 03/04/03 11:38AM >>>
> > This article came out in today's Washington Times, a conservative paper.
> > It
> > may be worth noting since recycling questions never go away.  From my
> > understanding, cardboard and aluminum recycling are both consistently
> > profitable and better for the environment overall.  (Glass and plastic
> > recycling get consistently mixed reviews.)   Any thoughts?
> >
> > Wynn Calder
> > -------------------------------------------
> > Time to throw out 'myth' of recycling
> > By David Harrison
> > LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH
> >
> >
> >       LONDON - Throw away the green and blue bags and forget those trips
> > to
> > return bottles - recycling household waste is a load of, well, rubbish,
> > say
> > leading environmentalists and waste campaigners. Top Stories
> >       In a reversal of decades-old wisdom, they argue that burning
> > cardboard,
> > plastics and food leftovers is better for the environment and the
economy
> > than recycling.
> >       They dismiss household trash separation - a practice encouraged by
> > the
> > green lobby - as a waste of time and money.
> >       The assertions, likely to horrify many environmentalists, are made
> > by
> > five campaigners from Sweden, a country renowned for its concern for the
> > environment and advanced approach to waste.
> >       They include Valfrid Paulsson, a former director-general of the
> > government's environmental protection agency; Soren Norrby, the former
> > campaign manager for Keep Sweden Tidy, and the former managing directors
> > of
> > three waste-collection companies.
> >       The Swedes' views are shared by many British local authorities,
who
> > have
> > drawn up plans to build up to 50 incinerators in an attempt to tackle a
> > growing waste mountain and cut the amount of garbage going to landfills.
> >       "For years, recycling has been held up as the best way to deal
with
> > waste. It's time that myth was exploded," said one deputy council leader
> > in
> > southern England.
> >       A spokesman for East Sussex County Council, which plans to build
an
> > incinerator, said, "It's idealistic to think that everything can be
> > recycled.
> > It's just not possible. Incineration has an important role to play."
> >       The Swedish group said that the "vision of a recycling market
> > booming by
> > 2010 was a dream 40 years ago and is still just a dream."
> >       The use of incineration to burn household waste - including
> > packaging
> > and food - "is best for the environment, the economy and the management
of
> > natural resources," they wrote in an article for the newspaper Dagens
> > Nyheter.
> >       Technological improvements have made incineration cleaner, the
> > article
> > said, and the process could be used to generate electricity, cutting
> > dependency on oil.
> >       Mr. Paulsson and his co-campaigners said that collecting household
> > cartons was "very unprofitable."
> >       Recycled bottles cost glass companies twice as much as the raw
> > materials, and recycling plastics was uneconomical, they said. "Plastics
> > are
> > made from oil and can quite simply be incinerated."
> >       The Swedes stressed that the collection of dangerous waste, such
as
> > batteries, electrical appliances, medicines, paint and chemicals "must
be
> > further improved."
> >       They added, "Protection of the environment can mean economic
> > sacrifices,
> > but to maintain the credibility of environmental politics the
> > environmental
> > gains must be worth the sacrifice."
> >       The Environmental Services Association, representing the British
> > waste
> > industry, agreed that the benefits of incineration had been largely
> > ignored.
> >       Andrew Ainsworth, its senior policy executive, said, "This is a
> > debate
> > that we need to have in this country. Recycled products have got to
> > compete
> > in a global market, and sometimes recycling will not be economically
> > viable
> > or environmentally sustainable."
> >       A spokesman for the government's Department for Environment, Food
> > and
> > Rural Affairs said incineration was "way down the list" because "it
causes
> > dangerous emissions, raises public concern and sends out a negative
> > message
> > about reuse."
> >
> > __________________
> > Wynn Calder
> > Associate Director
> > University Leaders for a Sustainable Future
> > 2100 L St., NW
> > Washington, DC 20037
> > T: 202-778-6114
> > F: 202-778-6138
> > W: www.ulsf.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: greenyes-unsubscribe@no.address
> > For additional commands, e-mail: greenyes-help@no.address
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: greenyes-unsubscribe@no.address
> For additional commands, e-mail: greenyes-help@no.address
>
>







[GreenYes Home] - [Date Index] - [Thread Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]