[GreenYes] Re: Ban on landfilling clothing proposed

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

Thanks, Peter, for sharing your numbers. The articles in the Norwegian press have emphasized the donation of clothing for reuse as the preferred alternative to landfilling. The issue of diapers was not mentioned, so I don't know it they were included in this category.

Cheers,

John 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: GreenYes@no.address [mailto:GreenYes@no.address]On
>Behalf Of Peter Spendelow
>Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 4:07 PM
>To: GreenYes
>Subject: [GreenYes] Re: Ban on landfilling clothing proposed
>
>
>
>This is an interesting note that John wrote.  At first I thought the
>figure that clothing comprises 8% of all decomposable waste in Norway
>must be too high.  Oregon's waste composition study shows that in 2002,
>1.6% of our waste was textiles, and another 1.3% was "mixed
>textile/material" which includes things such as shoes and belts as well
>any anything else that combines textiles with some other material.  Of
>course not all textiles are clothing.  We also include sheets, towels,
>curtains, and other items made of cloth in that category.  Disposable
>diapers are in a separate category in our study.  I don't know if you
>would consider diapers to be clothing, but they made up another 2.1% of
>Oregon's waste stream in 2002.  The bulk of their weight was not the
>textile component, but instead came from the liquids and solids
>absorbed or contained within.
>
>Then I noticed that the wording for Norway concerned clothing as a
>portion of the "decomposable waste" - not the total waste.  At least
>50% of Oregon's waste is fairly easily compostable, but I did not
>include textiles in this category since so many textiles are made from
>synthetic fabrics.  About 71% of Oregon's wastes include primarily
>organic molecules, where "organic" is used with the organic chemistry
>meaning of containing carbon.  Thus, plastics and tires are in the
>organic group even though neither is particularly compostable or
>decomposable.  If we take that maybe 60% of Oregon's waste is
>decomposable, then textiles and mixed textiles together could be as
>much as 5% of our decomposable waste, but not all of these textiles
>would be truly decomposable, and some of the decomposable textiles are
>not clothing.  Disposal diapers (gross weight) would add another 3.5%
>to our decomposable waste, though.
>
>Peter Spendelow
>Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
>
>Reindl, John wrote:
>> For your information
>>
>> A federal environmental agency in Norway has proposed 
>banning the landfilling of clothing.
>> Noting that people are buying increased quantities of 
>clothes -- which are being discarded at higher rates than 
>before -- the agency also notes that paradoxically, clothing 
>made of natural fibers contribute more to the generation of 
>methane gas in landfills than do articles made of synthetic 
>fibers. The Norwegian Pollution Control Agency (SFT) is 
>proposing that this ban go into effect in 2009 and is 
>primarily based on the global climate change impact of methane 
>that is released from landfills. According to an article in 
>Norway's largest newspaper, clothing is estimated to comprise 
>8% of all decomposable waste landfilled in the country, and 
>the ban on the disposal of clothing would be part of a larger 
>ban on the disposal of other decomposables.
>> 
>> John Reindl, Recycling Manager
>> Dane County, WI
>
>