Re: [greenyes] Single Stream - Reply to Follow on Questions

["Michele Raymond (Home)" <michele@no.address>]

Terri

Interesting point.

Actually you can standardize containers without violating anti-trust rules,
however industry opposes it beause they do not want designs dictated  If
there were less glass and the plastics was a bit standardized, then we'd use
less energy, less resources, and improve recyclability of the plastics
stream.  But this is the real world.

another point: beverage containers are a tiny part of the waste stream by
WEIGHT

However, has anyone ever studied what percentage of what people put at the
curb is beverage containers?]

And, has anyone looked at beverage containers by volume??

Just a thought outside the box.

Cheers
Michele
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steen, Terri - Contractor" <Terri_Steen@no.address>
To: "GreenYes" <greenyes@no.address>
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 3:11 PM
Subject: RE: [greenyes] Single Stream - Reply to Follow on Questions


> Jumping in with both feet here:
>
> Why don't we just stop using glass containers?
> That way, the waste stream would be more homogeneous, processing would be
> simpler, plastic capture rates would increase (because it would be more
> widely used), and we'd have one less plate to juggle when it comes to
> educating the public.  Sure, weights would go down, but volume would go
up.
> And heck, the glass container industry is an old dinosaur anyway.
> Who'd miss them?
>
> (I said both feet!)  Have a good weekend, Peter and GreenYessers!
>
> Terri
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Anderson [mailto:anderson@no.address]
> Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 3:01 PM
> To: GreenYes
> Subject: [greenyes] Single Stream - Reply to Follow on Questions
>
> 1. Dave Hirshler replied to my posting about single stream with this
> comment: "There is no argument that with single stream recycling more will
> be put out by the residents, the easier the program,
> the more participation."
>
> The answer is that not only is there a question, in fact it is NOT true.
I
> had a posting on this subject last month, pointing out that the detailed
> study done by Eureka Recycling which actually tested for all parameters
and
> found that it was the selection of the large rolled cart that was
> responsible for greater capture rates, NOT single stream.  Again, this is
> another case, where the program's proponents are using gross
> oversimplifications that create an impression that is the opposite of the
> facts.  Indeed, if single stream is co-collected with garbage, people
might,
> as the other postings have noted, become confused that it's all being
> trashed and recycle less.
>
> 2. Steve Hammer asks if much of the quality problems with single stream
> would be eliminated if glass were not part of the recycling program.
>
> That's a damn good question.  Clearly, Steve has put his finger on the nub
> of the matter: single stream effectively breaks all the glass to the point
> where it is no longer color sortable and its fragments get embedded into
> everything else.
>
> I think, though, that we'd need to ask this question a bit differently.
> Since glass is such a large fraction of the container weight, we'd suffer
a
> significant overall loss of recovery were we to JUST drop glass, and we'd
> need to make that up somewhere else in most cases.  For example, would
> residential mixed paper be added or, if it already has been, what else
would
> that be.  That needs to be determined first in order to assess how well
> single stream MRFs can sort that out.
>
> But, the bottom line answer tends to be yes.  Without glass, we have a
> potential pathway to not suffer from single stream's debilitating
downsides.
>
>
> Peter
> ______________________________
> Peter Anderson
> RECYCLEWORLDS CONSULTING Corp
> 4513 Vernon Blvd. Suite 15
> Madison, WI 53705
> Ph:    (608) 231-1100
> Fax:   (608) 233-0011
> Cell    (608) 438-9062
> email: anderson@no.address
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>