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

[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





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