RE: [greenyes] Carbon Trading Holds Potential to Give Expanded Co mposting Fairer Shake

["Reindl, John" <Reindl@no.address>]

And, of course, we should not just focus on composting; as shown by the US
EPA report on greenhouse gases associated with various alternatives for
managing solid wastes
(http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/ghg/ghg.htm), both source
reduction and recycling provide substantial savings.

For recycling, the biggest savings on a weight basis is from the recovery of
aluminum cans, while the largest total gains are from paper recycling. 

Perhaps there is a way to also provide recycling with some of the financial
beneifts of GHG emissions reductions? 

John Reindl
Dane County, WI 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Anderson [mailto:anderson@no.address]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 3:35 PM
> To: GreenYes
> Subject: Fw: [greenyes] Carbon Trading Holds Potential to 
> Give Expanded
> Composting Fairer Shake
> 
> 
>     I need to make a correction in my earlier posting on the 
> subject of 
> composting's gain from whenever the U.S. institutes carbon 
> trading here.
> 
>     As JW properly points out, methane only constitutes about half of 
> landfill gases, and consequently, the final output numbers I 
> provided need 
> to be divided by 2 to correct for that error.
> 
>     Under most, but not all scenarios, however, the impact of 
> carbon trading 
> when it comes could be very significant for expanding 
> composting, but were 
> we to capitalize on the opportunity.
> 
>                                                   Peter
> 
> ______________________
> Peter Anderson, President
> RECYCLEWORLDS CONSULTING
> 4513 Vernon Blvd. Suite 15
> Madison, WI 53705-4964
> Ph: (608) 231-1100
> Fax: (608) 233-0011
> Cell: (608) 698-1314
> eMail: anderson@no.address
> web: www.recycleworlds.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
>